Social-ecological drivers of metropolitan residents’ comfort living with wildlife

Jeffrey D. Haight, Kelli L. Larson, Jeffrey A. G. Clark, Jesse S. Lewis, Sharon J. Hall
{"title":"Social-ecological drivers of metropolitan residents’ comfort living with wildlife","authors":"Jeffrey D. Haight, Kelli L. Larson, Jeffrey A. G. Clark, Jesse S. Lewis, Sharon J. Hall","doi":"10.3389/fcosc.2023.1248238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Human-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. Methods Given 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)? Results We 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. Discussion By 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.","PeriodicalId":484005,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in conservation science","volume":"35 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in conservation science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2023.1248238","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Human-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. Methods Given 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)? Results We 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. Discussion By 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.
都市居民与野生动物舒适生活的社会生态驱动因素
城市中人类与野生动物的共存取决于居民如何看待和与社区中的野生动物互动。个人对野生动物的态度和反应主要受其主观认知判断的影响,包括多方面的环境价值和对风险或安全的看法。然而,与野生动物接触的经历也会对个人的环境态度产生积极或消极的影响,包括他们在野生动物附近生活的舒适度。以前关于人类与野生动物共存的研究通常集中在农村环境和与个别问题物种的冲突上,而与不同野生动物群落的积极互动研究不足。考虑到这一研究缺口,我们调查了亚利桑那州凤凰城大都会区12个社区居民对野生动物的态度,询问:居民生活的环境,以及他们的价值观,身份和个人特征,如何解释他们在不同野生动物群体(土狼,狐狸和兔子)附近生活的舒适程度?结果在野生动物附近生活舒适的居民普遍持有支持野生动物的价值取向,这反映了对野生动物的态度主要是由个人基于价值的判断驱动的预期。然而,态度还受到社会人口因素(例如,是否拥有宠物、性别认同)以及影响野生动物存在和熟悉程度的环境因素的进一步影响。具体来说,居住在离沙漠公园和保护区更近的居民更有可能对土狼和狐狸持积极态度,这些物种通常被居民认为对人类和家畜更有风险。通过更好地了解人们对城市野生动物的态度,这些结果可以帮助管理者通过降低风险和促进管理的策略有效地评估人类与野生动物共存的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信