Rebecca M. Niemiec, Michael Quartuch, Mireille Gonzalez, Veronica Champine, Andrew Mertens
{"title":"Social outcomes associated with a public and stakeholder engagement process for wolf reintroduction","authors":"Rebecca M. Niemiec, Michael Quartuch, Mireille Gonzalez, Veronica Champine, Andrew Mertens","doi":"10.1111/csp2.70058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A growing body of literature suggests that public and stakeholder engagement processes can be implemented to achieve social outcomes that can influence conservation goals. However, few studies have conducted assessments of the impacts of engagement processes on social outcomes over time. We examined whether there were changes in five social outcome indicators—knowledge, beliefs, acceptability of management options, trust in decision-makers, and social conflict—before and after the stakeholder and public engagement process for planning wolf reintroduction in Colorado. We focus on three samples—those engaged directly in the stakeholder process, additional stakeholders interested in the issue not directly involved in the process, and members of the public. We found that after the process, knowledge related to the conservation initiative increased a small amount among the public and stakeholders. Acceptance of certain management options (compensation for livestock losses and wolf hunting) increased slightly among the public, whereas stakeholders reported slightly more negative beliefs about the outcomes of wolf reintroduction after the process. The process did not appear to influence most measures of social conflict or trust in decision-makers. The public and stakeholders were also the least likely to believe the process would or did achieve reductions in social conflict. Our findings suggest that small increases in learning and acceptance of certain management options among the broader public and stakeholders may be associated with engagement processes, and that stakeholder perceptions about the impact of the process broadly align with pre- and post-changes in indicators of social outcomes. However, if conservation organizations are interested in decreasing social conflict or increasing trust in decision-makers, they should explicitly attend to this need in the design, evaluation, and adaptive management of stakeholder and public engagement processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.70058","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.70058","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A growing body of literature suggests that public and stakeholder engagement processes can be implemented to achieve social outcomes that can influence conservation goals. However, few studies have conducted assessments of the impacts of engagement processes on social outcomes over time. We examined whether there were changes in five social outcome indicators—knowledge, beliefs, acceptability of management options, trust in decision-makers, and social conflict—before and after the stakeholder and public engagement process for planning wolf reintroduction in Colorado. We focus on three samples—those engaged directly in the stakeholder process, additional stakeholders interested in the issue not directly involved in the process, and members of the public. We found that after the process, knowledge related to the conservation initiative increased a small amount among the public and stakeholders. Acceptance of certain management options (compensation for livestock losses and wolf hunting) increased slightly among the public, whereas stakeholders reported slightly more negative beliefs about the outcomes of wolf reintroduction after the process. The process did not appear to influence most measures of social conflict or trust in decision-makers. The public and stakeholders were also the least likely to believe the process would or did achieve reductions in social conflict. Our findings suggest that small increases in learning and acceptance of certain management options among the broader public and stakeholders may be associated with engagement processes, and that stakeholder perceptions about the impact of the process broadly align with pre- and post-changes in indicators of social outcomes. However, if conservation organizations are interested in decreasing social conflict or increasing trust in decision-makers, they should explicitly attend to this need in the design, evaluation, and adaptive management of stakeholder and public engagement processes.