We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
Collaborative and consensus‐based approaches for human–wildlife coexistence: response to Treves and Santiago‐Ávila 2020.
- Authors
Clark, Douglas A.; Brook, Ryan K.; Doney, Ethan D.; Frank, Beatrice; Jung, Thomas S.; Lee, David S.; Lambert, Simon; Parlee, Brenda
- Abstract
We welcome Treves and Santiago-Ávila (2020) attention to important questions about human-wildlife conflicts (HWCs) and coexistence (Frank et al., 2019; König et al., 2020; Pooley et al., 2020) and their probing of scientific objectivity in conservation (Artelle et al., 2014; Clark, 2019; Shrader-Frechette, 1996; Wallington & Moore, 2005). We are sure that Treves and Santiago-Ávila did not intend to overlook the importance or legitimacy of Indigenous peoples' interests in conservation. Such teaching would promote sharing responsibility and ownership over decision-making and create space for underrepresented and vulnerable groups, future humans, and nonhuman species--a gap Treves and Santiago-Ávila identified. These regimes are germane counterexamples within Treves and Santiago-Ávila's analytical scope because they establish harvest quotas and routinely contend with HWCs (e.g., Clark et al., 2014, 2016; Dowsley & Wenzel, 2008).
- Subjects
TRADITIONAL ecological knowledge; ANIMAL populations; BIODIVERSITY conservation; CONSERVATION biology; TRADITIONAL knowledge
- Publication
Conservation Biology, 2021, Vol 35, Issue 4, p1334
- ISSN
0888-8892
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1111/cobi.13787