Skip to main content

Value diversity and conservation conflict: Lessons from the management of red grouse and hen harriers in England

St John, Freya A.V., Steadman, Janna, Austen, Gail E., Redpath, Steve M., Gibbs, Leah (2019) Value diversity and conservation conflict: Lessons from the management of red grouse and hen harriers in England. People and Nature, 1 (1). pp. 6-17. ISSN 2575-8314. (doi:10.1002/pan3.5) (KAR id:71754)

PDF Publisher pdf
Language: English


Download (526kB) Preview
[thumbnail of John_et_al-2018-People_and_Nature.pdf]
Preview
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
Request an accessible format
Official URL
https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.5

Abstract

1. Conflicts between people over wildlife management are damaging, widespread, and notoriously difficult to resolve where people hold different values and worldviews. Cognitive approaches examining steps from human thought to action can help us understand conflict and explore strategies for their management.

3. Guided by conceptual frameworks from social and environmental psychology, we conducted a questionnaire‐based study to assess wildlife value orientations of key stakeholders. We quantified attitudes towards hen harriers, grouse shooting, gamekeepers, and raptor conservationists. We also measured support/opposition for harrier management strategies in England and investigated trust in the responsible government authority.

5. Utilitarian value orientations were prominent among Field sport and Non‐raptor respondents. Most Pro‐raptor and Pro‐bird participants held mutualist value orientations, indicating they did not support shooting or management of wildlife.

7. Pro‐bird affiliates showed clear preference for less invasive management, and along with Pro‐raptor respondents did not support brood management (removal and later release of eggs/young when harrier density is high). Field sport individuals expressed a degree of support for all management types. Trust in Natural England was limited.

8. Understanding value orientations and attitudes of stakeholders helps explain differences in levels of support for management approaches. Our study highlighted strongly divergent beliefs. Such positions are hard to change. Increasing the level of ecological knowledge alone is unlikely to facilitate conflict management. Instead, conflict management would benefit from combining such knowledge with a focus on relationships, deliberation, and trust in addition to exploring comanagement interventions.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.1002/pan3.5
Uncontrolled keywords: conflict, conservation psychology, perceptions, hen harrier, predator, red grouse, trust, wildlife value orientations
Divisions: Divisions > Division of Human and Social Sciences > School of Anthropology and Conservation > DICE (Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology)
Depositing User: J. Steadman
Date Deposited: 21 Jan 2019 16:45 UTC
Last Modified: 16 Feb 2021 14:01 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/71754 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)
Austen, Gail E.: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6005-4869
  • Depositors only (login required):

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year