Understanding drivers of human tolerance to gray wolves and brown bears as a strategy to improve landholder– carnivore coexistence

• Main Authors: Marino, Filippo, Shivji, Irene, Di Croce, Antonio, Ciucci, Paolo, Knight, Andrew T., Kansky, Ruth
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley Periodicals LLC. 2020
• Subjects: Apennine brown bear > Italy > Abruzzo; Biodiversity conflicts; Conservation psychology; Gray wolf > Italy > Abruzzo; Human-wolf encounters > Europe; Intangible benefits; Intangible costs; Wildlife Tolerance Model > Economic aspects; Brown bear > Effect of human beings on > Italy; Gray Wolves > Effect of human beings on > Italy; Carnivora > Europe > Geographical distribution; Canis lupus; gray wolf; Ursus arctos
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/126861

CITATION: Marino, F, Kansky, R, Shivji, I, Di Croce, A, Ciucci, P, Knight, AT. Understanding drivers of human tolerance to gray wolves and brown bears as a strategy to improve landholder–carnivore coexistence. Conservation Science and Practice. 2021; 3:e265. doi.10.1111/csp2.265 The original publication is available at: onlinelibrary.wiley.com Despite recent recovery of large carnivores throughout Europe such as the brown bear (Ursus arctos) and the graywolf (Canis lupus), some of their populations are still threatened and their viability depends on human tolerance to share mixed landscapes. We investigated the drivers of landholders' tolerance in Abruzzo (Italy), a region with a long history of cohabitation, by applying theWildlife Tolerance Model (WTM) (Kansky et al., 2016, Biological Conservation, 201, 137–145). Using structural equation modeling we assessed relationships between WTM variables. This framework hypothesizes that exposure to a species and experiences with a species drive perceptions of benefits and costs, and ultimately tolerance.We then sought to understand similarities and differences in tolerance drivers between the two species and across two areas that differed in the duration of human–carnivore cohabitation. Results showed both similarities and differences in drivers between species and areas, resulting in seven management proposals to foster tolerance. Increasing intangible benefits and positive experiences were two strategies that were similar for both species and areas,while five strategies differed across species and areas.Our methodological approach can be applied in other landscapes with other species to determine the extent to whichmultispeciesmanagement across landscapes is possible. Publisher’s version