Animal agency: wildlife management from a kincentric perspective

Insights on human-wildlife coexistence from social science and Indigenous and traditional knowledge

Much work on human-wildlife conflict focuses on safeguarding wildlife from humans and vice versa, protecting humans, their crops, livestock, and property from wildlife, and mitigating negative, sometimes lethal encounters. The emphasis is on conflict, a framing that reinforces human-nature dualisms and instills the notion of humans and wild animals as adversaries. Although human-wildlife interactions are sometimes negative, they can also be neutral, coadaptive, and mutually beneficial. They can demonstrate coexistence. Conservationists have tended to overlook or simplify such relations. They have either failed to define coexistence or characterized it as the outcome of externally driven conservation strategies. Conflict has been perceived as the norm, with coexistence a distant ideal. This way of seeing ignores the many ways people have coexisted with wildlife and coadapted with wild animals in multispecies landscapes for generations. We encourage greater attention to Indigenous and traditional experiences and knowledge, and seeing how coexistence can be a norm, which sometimes includes negative interactions and conflict. Scholars in geography, anthropology, animal studies, philosophy, Indigenous studies, and multispecies ethnography offer insights into how paying attention to coexistence can reshape understanding of human-wildlife interactions that decenters humans, and actively supports ethical conservation. Contributions from social scientists include focusing on relational ways of thinking and seeing that the lives of humans and other beings are intertwined and not governed solely by conflict.

A Review of Indigenous Perspectives in Animal Biosciences

This article addresses the underrepresentation of Indigenous perspectives in animal sciences by challenging the exclusive use of Western scientific paradigms in research and education. Because of the systematic exclusion of Indigenous peoples, Indigenous perspectives have rarely been represented through empirical study, leading us to believe this is a key reason for the underrepresentation of Native people in these fields. We conducted a literature review, searching for Indigenous contributions in animal sciences and finding a handful of articles in three areas: human-animal bonds, genetic testing and breeding programs, and Traditional Ecological Knowledge. Given the interconnected paradigm of Indigenous worldviews, we suggest that the ongoing siloes of scientific disciplines and the hierarchy of methodology contribute to the dearth of Indigenous perspectives. We suggest increased support for proper tribal consultation, contextualization of the history of research in Native communities, and the creation of scholarly spaces to support these conversations.

Animal agency in wildlife conservation and management

Wildlife conservation and management (WCM) practices have been historically drawn from a wide variety of academic fields, yet practitioners have been slow to engage with emerging conversations about animals as complex beings, whose individuality and sociality influence their relationships with humans. We propose an explicit acknowledgement of wild, nonhuman animals as active participants in WCM. We examined 190 studies of WCM interventions and outcomes to highlight 3 common assumptions that underpin many present approaches to WCM: animal behaviors are rigid and homogeneous; wildlife exhibit idealized wild behavior and prefer pristine habitats; and human-wildlife relationships are of marginal or secondary importance relative to nonhuman interactions. We found that these management interventions insufficiently considered animal learning, decision-making, individuality, sociality, and relationships with humans and led to unanticipated detrimental outcomes. To address these shortcomings, we synthesized theoretical advances in animal behavioral sciences, animal geographies, and animal legal theory that may help conservation professionals reconceptualize animals and their relationships with humans. Based on advances in these fields, we constructed the concept of animal agency, which we define as the ability of animals to actively influence conservation and management outcomes through their adaptive, context-specific, and complex behaviors that are predicated on their sentience, individuality, lived experiences, cognition, sociality, and cultures in ways that shape and reshape shared human-wildlife cultures, spaces, and histories. Conservation practices, such as compassionate conservation, convivial conservation, and ecological justice, incorporate facets of animal agency. Animal agency can be incorporated in conservation problem-solving by assessing the ways in which agency contributes to species' survival and by encouraging more adaptive and collaborative decision-making among human and nonhuman stakeholders.

Indigenous insights on human-wildlife coexistence in southern India

As human-wildlife conflicts escalate worldwide, concepts such as tolerance and acceptance of wildlife are becoming increasingly important. Yet, contemporary conservation studies indicate a limited understanding of positive human-wildlife interactions, leading to potentially inaccurate representations of human-animal encounters. Failure to address these limitations contributes to the design and implementation of poor wildlife and landscape management plans and the dismissal of Indigenous ecological knowledge. We examined Indigenous perspectives on human-wildlife coexistence in India by drawing ethnographic evidence from Kattunayakans, a forest-dwelling Adivasi community living in the Wayanad Wildlife Sanctuary in Kerala. Through qualitative field study that involved interviews and transect walks inside the forests, we found that Kattunayakans displayed tolerance and acceptance of wild animals characterized as forms of deep coexistence that involves three central ideas: wild animals as rational conversing beings; wild animals as gods, teachers, and equals; and wild animals as relatives with shared origins practicing dharmam. We argue that understanding these adequately will support efforts to bring Kattunayakan perspectives into the management of India's forests and contribute to the resolution of the human-wildlife conflict more broadly.

Large carnivore hunting and the social license to hunt

The social license to operate framework considers how society grants or withholds informal permission for resource extractors to exploit publicly owned resources. We developed a modified model, which we refer to as the social license to hunt (SLH). In it we similarly consider hunters as operators, given that wildlife are legally considered public resources in North America and Europe. We applied the SLH model to examine the controversial hunting of large carnivores, which are frequently killed for trophies. Killing for trophies is widespread, but undertaken by a minority of hunters, and can pose threats to the SLH for trophy-seeking carnivore hunters and potentially beyond. Societal opposition to large carnivore hunting relates not only to conservation concerns but also to misalignment between killing for trophies and dominant public values and attitudes concerning the treatment of animals. We summarized cases related to the killing of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), wolves (Canis lupus), and other large carnivores in Canada, the United States, and Europe to illustrate how opposition to large carnivore hunting, now expressed primarily on social media, can exert rapid and significant pressure on policy makers and politicians. Evidence of the potential for transformative change to wildlife management and conservation includes proposed and realized changes to legislation, business practice, and wildlife policy, including the banning of some large carnivore hunts. Given that policy is ultimately shaped by societal values and attitudes, research gaps include developing increased insight into public support of various hunting policies beyond that derived from monitoring of social media and public polling. Informed by increased evidence, the SLH model can provide a conceptual foundation for predicting the likelihood of transient versus enduring changes to wildlife conservation policy and practice for a wide variety of taxa and contexts.

From killing lists to healthy country: Aboriginal approaches to weed control in the Kimberley, Western Australia

The Australian Government's funding of land management by Aboriginal communities aims to enable them to manage natural and cultural resources according to their values and aspirations. But this approach is countered in the case of weed management, where the emphasis is on killing plants that are identified on invasive alien species lists prepared by government agencies. Based on field research with Bardi-Jawi, Bunuba, Ngurrara, Nyikina Mangala and Wunggurr land managers in the Kimberley region of Western Australia, we observed that 27 of 35 weed control projects followed the government agency weed lists for species-led control. Of these 27 projects, only two were considered successful in meeting Aboriginal cultural aspirations. In most of the other cases, the list-based approach generated frustration among Aboriginal rangers who felt they were engaged in purposeless killing. In contrast, we found that elders and rangers preferred site-based approaches that considered landscape and vegetation management from their culturally specific and highly contextual geographies of 'healthy country'. We outline instances where ranger groups have adopted site-based management that has been informed by geographies of healthy country and argue that such an approach offers a better alternative to current list-based weed control and produces positive outcomes for Aboriginal communities.