Understanding tolerance for an invasive species: An investigation of hunter acceptance capacity for wild pigs (Sus scrofa) in Texas.

Invasive species and their establishment in new areas have significant impacts on the ecological, economic, and social well-being of our planet. Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) are one of the world's most formidable invasive species, particularly in the United States. They cause significant damage to agriculture and ecosystems, and can transmit diseases to livestock, wildlife, and people. There is an inherent social dimension to the issue of wild pigs due in part to the fact that people hunt them. Hunting contributes to both the control and spread of this species. The objectives of this study were to: 1) determine hunters' overall tolerance for wild pigs; and 2) identify what factors predict hunters' tolerance. Results obtained from a survey of Texas hunters in 2019 indicated that 83% of hunters had a low level of tolerance for wild pigs, with approximately 63% preferring to see the population reduced and 20% preferring to see the population completely removed. Fourteen percent preferred that wild pig numbers remain the same, and 2% preferred to see numbers increase. Results from regression analysis indicated that approximately 53% of the variance in tolerance for wild pigs was explained by motivations and preferences for hunting wild pigs, level of concern for wild pig damage, and overall attitudes toward wild pigs. Results of this research are useful in expanding current knowledge about human tolerance for wildlife, including those species that are non-native and invasive, and in identifying important factors affecting how hunters perceive and interact with wild pigs. Study findings are also helpful in informing the development of effective and socially acceptable management plans for wild pigs, as well as communication efforts aimed at influencing hunters' attitudes and behaviors in the wild pig management context.

Psychological drivers of risk-reducing behaviors to limit human-wildlife conflict.

Conflicts between people and wild animals are increasing globally, often with serious consequences for both. Local regulations or ordinances are frequently used to promote human behaviors that minimize these conflicts (risk-reducing behaviors), but compliance with ordinances can be highly variable. While efforts to increase compliance could be improved through applications of conservation psychology, little is known about the relative influence of different factors motivating compliance. Using concepts from psychology and risk theory, we conducted a longitudinal study pairing data from mail surveys with direct observations of compliance with a wildlife ordinance requiring residents to secure residential garbage from black bears (Ursus americanus). We assessed the relative influence of beliefs and attitudes toward bears and bear proofing, perceived behavioral control, perceived risks and benefits assigned to bears, norms, trust in management, previous experience with conflicts, and demographics on compliance behavior (i.e., bear proofing). Data on previous experience were obtained through direct observation and survey reports. We found that higher compliance rates were associated with more observed conflicts on a respondent's block. Counter to expectations, however, residents were less compliant when they were more trusting of the management agency and perceived more benefits from bears. We suggest that messages have the potential to increase compliance when they empower residents by linking successful management of conflicts to individual actions and emphasize how reducing conflicts could maintain benefits provided by wildlife. Modifying existing educational materials to account for these psychological considerations and evaluating their impact on compliance behavior over time are important next steps in changing human behaviors relevant to the globally important problem of human-wildlife conflict.

Impulsores Psicológicos de los Comportamientos Reductores de Riesgo para Limitar el Conflicto Humano - Fauna Resumen Los conflictos entre las personas y la fauna cada vez son más a nivel mundial y con frecuencia tienen consecuencias severas para ambos. Las regulaciones o decretos locales se usan frecuentemente para promover comportamientos humanos que minimizan estos conflictos (comportamientos reductores de riesgo), pero el cumplimiento de los decretos puede ser altamente variable. Mientras que los esfuerzos por incrementar el cumplimiento podrían mejorar por medio de la aplicación de la psicología de la conservación, se conoce poco sobre la influencia relativa de los diferentes factores que motivan al cumplimiento. Realizamos un estudio longitudinal mediante conceptos tomados de la psicología y la teoría del riesgo. Este estudio emparejó datos obtenidos de encuestas por correo con observaciones directas del cumplimiento de un decreto de fauna que requiere que los residentes protejan los desechos residenciales de los osos negros (Ursus americanus) (es decir, hacerlas a prueba de osos). Evaluamos la influencia relativa de las creencias y las actitudes hacia los osos y hacia hacer los desechos a prueba de osos, el control del comportamiento percibido, los riesgos percibidos y los beneficios asignados a los osos, las normas, la confianza en el manejo, la experiencia previa con conflictos y la demografía del comportamiento de cumplimiento. Los datos sobre la experiencia previa se obtuvieron mediante observación directa y reportes de las encuestas. Encontramos que las tasas más altas de cumplimiento estuvieron asociadas con un mayor número de conflictos observados en la cuadra del respondiente. Sin embargo, contrario a las expectativas, los residentes fueron menos obedientes cuando tuvieron mayor confianza en la agencia de manejo y percibieron más beneficios de la presencia de osos. Sugerimos que los mensajes tienen el potencial de incrementar el cumplimiento cuando empoderan a los residentes al vincular el manejo exitoso de los conflictos con las acciones individuales y enfatizan cómo la reducción de los conflictos podría mantener los beneficios que proporciona la fauna. La modificación de los materiales educativos existentes para que tomen en cuenta estas consideraciones psicológicas y la evaluación de su impacto sobre el comportamiento de cumplimiento a lo largo del tiempo son los siguientes pasos importantes para modificar el comportamiento humano relevante para el problema mundialmente importante que es el conflicto humano - fauna.

The changing sociocultural context of wildlife conservation.

We introduced a multilevel model of value shift to describe the changing social context of wildlife conservation. Our model depicts how cultural-level processes driven by modernization (e.g., increased wealth, education, and urbanization) affect changes in individual-level cognition that prompt a shift from domination to mutualism wildlife values. Domination values promote beliefs that wildlife should be used primarily to benefit humans, whereas mutualism values adopt a view that wildlife are part of one's social network and worthy of care and compassion. Such shifts create emergent effects (e.g., new interest groups) and challenges to wildlife management organizations (e.g., increased conflict) and dramatically alter the sociopolitical context of conservation decisions. Although this model is likely applicable to many modernized countries, we tested it with data from a 2017-2018 nationwide survey (mail and email panel) of 43,949 residents in the United States. We conducted hierarchical linear modeling and correlational analysis to examine relationships. Modernization variables had strong state-level effects on domination and mutualism. Higher levels of education, income, and urbanization were associated with higher percentages of mutualists and lower percentages of traditionalists, who have strong domination values. Values affected attitudes toward wildlife management challenges; for example, states with higher proportions of mutualists were less supportive of lethal control of wolves (Canis lupus) and had lower percentages of active hunters, who represent the traditional clientele of state wildlife agencies in the United States. We contend that agencies will need to embrace new strategies to engage and represent a growing segment of the public with mutualism values. Our model merits testing for application in other countries.

El Cambiante Contexto Sociocultural de la Conservación de Fauna Resumen Introdujimos un modelo multinivel del cambio de valores para describir el cambiante contexto social de la conservación de fauna. Nuestro modelo representa cómo los procesos a nivel cultural llevados por la modernización (p. ej.: aumento de riqueza, educación y urbanización) afectan a los cambios en la cognición a nivel individual que incitan a un cambio de los valores de dominación a los valores de mutualismo de la fauna. Los valores de dominación promueven la creencia de que la fauna debería usarse principalmente para beneficio de los humanos, mientras que los valores de mutualismo adoptan una visión de que la fauna es parte de la red social de uno y digna de cuidados y compasión. Dichos cambios generan efectos emergentes (p. ej.: nuevos grupos de interés) y retos para las organizaciones de manejo de fauna (p. ej.: conflictos mayores) y alteran dramáticamente el contexto sociopolítico de las decisiones de conservación. Aunque este modelo probablemente pueda aplicarse a muchos países modernizados, lo pusimos a prueba con datos de un censo nacional de 2017 - 2018 realizado (por correo y correo electrónico) a 43,949 residentes de los Estados Unidos. Realizamos un modelado jerárquico lineal y un análisis de correlación para examinar las relaciones. Las variables de modernización tuvieron efectos sólidos a nivel estatal sobre la dominación y el mutualismo. Los niveles altos de educación, ingresos y urbanización estuvieron asociados con los porcentajes más altos de mutualistas y con los porcentajes más bajos de tradicionalistas, quienes tienen valores de dominación fuertes. Los valores afectaron a las actitudes hacia los retos para el manejo de fauna; por ejemplo, los estados con proporciones mayores de mutualistas mostraron un menor apoyo para el control letal de los lobos (Canis lupus) y tuvieron porcentajes más bajos de cazadores activos, quienes representan a la clientela tradicional de las agencias estatales de vida silvestre en los Estados Unidos. Sostenemos que las agencias necesitarán adoptar nuevas estrategias para envolver y representar a un segmento creciente del público con valores mutualistas. Nuestro modelo amerita ser evaluado para su aplicación en otros países.

Why social values cannot be changed for the sake of conservation.

The hope for creating widespread change in social values has endured among conservation professionals since early calls by Aldo Leopold for a "land ethic." However, there has been little serious attention in conservation to the fields of investigation that address values, how they are formed, and how they change. We introduce a social-ecological systems conceptual approach in which values are seen not only as motivational goals people hold but also as ideas that are deeply embedded in society's material culture, collective behaviors, traditions, and institutions. Values define and bind groups, organizations, and societies; serve an adaptive role; and are typically stable across generations. When abrupt value changes occur, they are in response to substantial alterations in the social-ecological context. Such changes build on prior value structures and do not result in complete replacement. Given this understanding of values, we conclude that deliberate efforts to orchestrate value shifts for conservation are unlikely to be effective. Instead, there is an urgent need for research on values with a multilevel and dynamic view that can inform innovative conservation strategies for working within existing value structures. New directions facilitated by a systems approach will enhance understanding of the role values play in shaping conservation challenges and improve management of the human component of conservation.

Mainstreaming the social sciences in conservation.

Despite broad recognition of the value of social sciences and increasingly vocal calls for better engagement with the human element of conservation, the conservation social sciences remain misunderstood and underutilized in practice. The conservation social sciences can provide unique and important contributions to society's understanding of the relationships between humans and nature and to improving conservation practice and outcomes. There are 4 barriers-ideological, institutional, knowledge, and capacity-to meaningful integration of the social sciences into conservation. We provide practical guidance on overcoming these barriers to mainstream the social sciences in conservation science, practice, and policy. Broadly, we recommend fostering knowledge on the scope and contributions of the social sciences to conservation, including social scientists from the inception of interdisciplinary research projects, incorporating social science research and insights during all stages of conservation planning and implementation, building social science capacity at all scales in conservation organizations and agencies, and promoting engagement with the social sciences in and through global conservation policy-influencing organizations. Conservation social scientists, too, need to be willing to engage with natural science knowledge and to communicate insights and recommendations clearly. We urge the conservation community to move beyond superficial engagement with the conservation social sciences. A more inclusive and integrative conservation science-one that includes the natural and social sciences-will enable more ecologically effective and socially just conservation. Better collaboration among social scientists, natural scientists, practitioners, and policy makers will facilitate a renewed and more robust conservation. Mainstreaming the conservation social sciences will facilitate the uptake of the full range of insights and contributions from these fields into conservation policy and practice.

Social values and biodiversity conservation in a dynamic world.

Understanding what shape values (which ultimately shape human behavior) will help improve the effectiveness of conservation solutions that depend on public support. To contribute to this understanding, we investigated the influence of societal-level changes, such as modernization, on values in a multilevel framework. We collected survey responses (n = 4183) to questionnaires mailed to a random selection of households within each county in Washington (U.S.A.) (response rate 32%). We used multilevel modeling to determine the relationship between modernization (e.g., county-level urbanization, wealth, and education) and wildlife value orientations (values that shape thought about wildlife) while controlling for individual-level sociodemographics. We then explored how values influence conservation support at different levels (e.g., individual and county) and how values explain conservation support in a case study of public responses to wolf (Canis lupis) recovery. We found positive associations between county-level examples of modernization and mutualism (a wildlife value orientation that prioritizes the perceived needs of wildlife) independent of a respondent's sociodemographics, and negative associations between modernization and domination (a wildlife value orientation that prioritizes human needs). Our results suggest that context has an additive impact on one's values; certain locations exhibited domination values, whereas others exhibited a mix of value types. This finding is important because actions that restrict human interests to promote biodiversity were negatively associated with domination and positively associated with mutualism. In the wolf case study, mutualism was strongly correlated with less social conflict over wolf recovery in many, but not all, counties (e.g., Pearson's r correlation = 0.59 in one county and a nonsignificant correlation in another). Our findings suggest that modernization operates on values within a state with implications for biodiversity, but other factors in addition to values must be investigated to fully understand what leads to proconservation behavior.

Implications of human value shift and persistence for biodiversity conservation.

Large-scale change in human values and associated behavior change is believed by some to be the ultimate solution to achieve global biodiversity conservation. Yet little is known about the dynamics of values. We contribute to this area of inquiry by examining the trajectory of values affecting views of wildlife in North America. Using data from a 19-state study in the United States and global data from the Schwartz Value Survey, we explored questions of value persistence and change and the nature of attitudinal responses regarding wildlife conservation issues. We found support, based on subjects' ancestry, for the supposition that domination is a prevalent American value orientation toward wildlife that has origins in European Judeo-Christian traditions. Independent of that effect, we also found indications of change. Modernization is contributing to a shift from domination to mutualism value orientations, which is fostering attitudes less centered on human interests and seemingly more consistent with a biocentric philosophy. Our findings suggest that if value shift could be achieved in a purposeful way, then significant and widespread behavior change believed necessary for long-term conservation success may indeed be possible. In particular, greater emphasis on mutualism values may help provide the context for more collaborative approaches to support future conservation efforts. However, given the societal forces at play, it is not at all clear that human-engineered value shift is tenable. Instead of developing strategies aimed at altering values, it may be more productive to create strategies that recognize and work within the boundaries of existing values. Whereas values appear to be in a period of flux, it will be difficult to predict future trends without a better understanding of value formation and shift, particularly under conditions of rapid social-ecological change.

Understanding the diversity of public interests in wildlife conservation.

North American state wildlife agencies are increasingly faced with the challenge of effectively representing a diverse public. With increasing social conflict over wildlife issues, the future of wildlife conservation hinges on preparedness of the profession to respond to this challenge. In the interest of finding ways to improve response, 19 agencies in the western U.S. joined forces to initiate an investigation that would provide a better understanding of the diversity of wildlife-related interests in the region. Specific objectives, accomplished through use of a mail survey administered in 2004, were to categorize people on the basis of their value orientations toward wildlife and explore how different groups were distributed across states and to examine differences on sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes toward wildlife-related topics among groups. The focus was on two orientations: domination (view of wildlife that prioritizes human well-being over wildlife and treats wildlife in utilitarian terms); and mutualism (view of wildlife as capable of relationships of trust with humans and defined by a desire for companionship with wildlife). Four types of people were identified on the basis of these orientations. Types differed in their geographic distribution and wildlife-related attitudes and behaviors, revealing how value orientations can form the foundation for conflict on wildlife issues. Our characterizations of stakeholder groups offer a framework that can be applied over time and across geographic scales to improve conservation planning efforts and inform broader thinking about the social aspects of wildlife conservation.