Novel insights into the cognitive, emotional, and experiential dimensions of stakeholder acceptance of wildlife management

Understanding wildlife stakeholders is vital in mitigating the risk for inertia in the implementation of management and illegal activities, e.g., poaching. We used a unique set of questionnaire data of stakeholders in Sweden (n = 8728) comprising birdwatchers, hunters, farmers, and the general public, to analyze evaluations of geese, beliefs about goose management at multiple levels, and acceptance of management tools. Also, a hierarchical model incorporating prior wildlife experience and integrating cognitions and emotions for acceptance was tested. The overall attitude towards geese was positive, but ecosystem disservices caused by large populations were acknowledged. The general public and birdwatchers displayed trust in the national, regional, and local levels. In contrast, farmers and hunters trusted mainly the local level. Broad stakeholder acceptance was found for several non-lethal tools for damage reduction and more generally a goose conservation approach including e.g., hunting free zones, but also for hunting during open hunting season. We found support for the proposed model in relation to acceptance of both the conservation and the lethal approach, thereby advancing theory integration. Results suggest that while goose conservation is widely accepted, problems caused by geese and distrust in the higher management levels among some stakeholder groups need to be addressed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2024-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-80661-2
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Animal and Plant Science Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.22

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Novel insights into the cognitive, emotional, and experiential dimensions of stakeholder acceptance of wildlife management

Camilla Sandström, Johan Elmberg, Louise Eriksson, Niklas Liljebäck et al.
5 citations
Scientific Reports
Animal and Plant Science Education
3.22
article

Novel insights into the cognitive, emotional, and experiential dimensions of stakeholder acceptance of wildlife management

Camilla Sandström, Johan Elmberg, Louise Eriksson, Niklas Liljebäck, Johan Månsson, Maria Johansson
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Understanding wildlife stakeholders is vital in mitigating the risk for inertia in the implementation of management and illegal activities, e.g., poaching. We used a unique set of questionnaire data of stakeholders in Sweden (n = 8728) comprising birdwatchers, hunters, farmers, and the general public, to analyze evaluations of geese, beliefs about goose management at multiple levels, and acceptance of management tools. Also, a hierarchical model incorporating prior wildlife experience and integrating cognitions and emotions for acceptance was tested. The overall attitude towards geese was positive, but ecosystem disservices caused by large populations were acknowledged. The general public and birdwatchers displayed trust in the national, regional, and local levels. In contrast, farmers and hunters trusted mainly the local level. Broad stakeholder acceptance was found for several non-lethal tools for damage reduction and more generally a goose conservation approach including e.g., hunting free zones, but also for hunting during open hunting season. We found support for the proposed model in relation to acceptance of both the conservation and the lethal approach, thereby advancing theory integration. Results suggest that while goose conservation is widely accepted, problems caused by geese and distrust in the higher management levels among some stakeholder groups need to be addressed.

Scientific ReportsVol. 14(1)
Lund University (SE), Kristianstad University (SE), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE), Umeå University (SE)
Naturvårdsverket, Umeå Universitet
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Animal and Plant Science Education
3.22
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.