Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T12:26:49.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - A Framework for Assessing and Quantifying Human–Wildlife Interactions in Urban Areas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2019

By
Carl D. Soulsbury  and
Piran C. L. White
Edited by
Beatrice Frank ,
Jenny A. Glikman  and
Silvio Marchini
Beatrice Frank
Affiliation:
Capital Regional District of Victoria Regional Parks
Jenny A. Glikman
Affiliation:
Institute for Conservation Research, San Diego Zoo Global
Silvio Marchini
Affiliation:
Universidade de São Paulo
Get access

Summary

Humans and wildlife in urban areas will inevitably interact, but the type of interactions and their frequency and severity will vary substantially. Whilst most work has focused on conflict, we emphasize that positive and benign interactions are of extreme importance. In this chapter, we review relevant frameworks from different disciplinary contexts that could be used to help build a better understanding of human–wildlife interactions in urban areas. We illustrate how these may be applied and discuss their usefulness and limitations through relevant examples. We then develop the idea of keystone urban wildlife species based on positive or beneficial human–wildlife interactions. We conclude by discussing how the field needs to advance in light of these analyses.
Type
Chapter
Information
Human–Wildlife Interactions
Turning Conflict into Coexistence
 , pp. 107 - 128
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

6.8 References

Baker, P. J., Dowding, C. V., Molony, S. E., White, P. C. L. & Harris, S. (2007). Activity patterns of urban red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) reduce the risk of traffic-induced mortality. Behavioral Ecology, 18(4), 716–24.Google Scholar
Baker, P., Funk, S., Harris, S., Newman, T., Saunders, G. & White, P. C. L. (2004). The impact of human attitudes on the social and spatial organization of urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes) before and after an outbreak of sarcoptic mange. In Shaw, W. W., Harris, L. K. & VanDruff, L., eds., Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Urban Wildlife Conservation, School of Natural Resources, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Tucson: University of Arizona, pp. 153–63.Google Scholar
Baker, P. J. & Harris, S. (2007). Urban mammals: What does the future hold? An analysis of the factors affecting patterns of use of residential gardens in Great Britain. Mammal Review, 37, 297–315.Google Scholar
Barua, M., Bhagwat, S. A. & Jadhav, S. (2013). The hidden dimensions of human–wildlife conflict: Health impacts, opportunity and transaction costs. Biological Conservation, 157, 309–16.Google Scholar
Bath, A. J. & Enck, J. W. (2003). Wildlife–human interactions in National Parks in Canada and the USA. National Park Service; and USA Department of the Interior All U.S. Government Documents (Utah Regional Depository). Paper 424. Available from http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs/424 (accessed 24 October 2018).Google Scholar
Belant, J. L. (1997). Gulls in urban environments: Landscape-level management to reduce conflict. Landscape & Urban Planning, 38(3–4), 245–58.Google Scholar
Brock, M., Perino, G. & Sugden, R. (2015). The warden attitude: An investigation of the value of interaction with everyday wildlife. Environmental & Resource Economics, 67(1), 127–55.Google Scholar
Carter, N. H., Shrestha, B. K., Karki, J. B., Pradhan, N. M. B. & Liu, J. (2012). Coexistence between wildlife and humans at fine spatial scales. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(38), 15360–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cassidy, A. & Mills, B. (2012). Fox tots attack shock: Urban foxes, mass media and boundary-breaching. Environmental Communication, 6(4), 494–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X. & Wu, S. (2014). Examining patterns of animal–vehicle collisions in Alabama, USA. Human–Wildlife Interactions, 8(2), 235–44.Google Scholar
Chowdhury, A. N., Mondal, R., Brahma, A. & Biswas, M. K. (2016). Ecopsychosocial aspects of human–tiger conflict: An ethnographic study of tiger widows of Sundarban Delta, India. Environmental Health Insights, 10, 1–29.Google ScholarPubMed
Clark, N. E., Lovell, R., Wheeler, B. W., Higgins, S. L., Depledge, M. H. & Norris, K. (2014). Biodiversity, cultural pathways, and human health: A framework. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 29(4), 198–204.Google Scholar
Clucas, B., Rabotyagov, S. & Marzluff, J. M. (2015). How much is that birdie in my backyard? A cross-continental economic valuation of native urban songbirds. Urban Ecosystems, 18(1), 251–66.Google Scholar
Cox, D. T. C. & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Urban bird feeding: Connecting people with nature. PLoS ONE, 11(7), e0158717.Google Scholar
Curtin, S. (2009). Wildlife tourism: The intangible, psychological benefits of human–wildlife encounters. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(5), 451–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtin, S. (2010). What makes for memorable wildlife encounters? Revelations from ‘serious’ wildlife tourists. Journal of Ecotourism, 9(2), 149–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damerell, P., Howe, C. & Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2013). Child-orientated environmental education influences adult knowledge and household behaviour. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1), 015016.Google Scholar
Davidson, R. K., Romig, T., Jenkins, E., Tryland, M. & Robertson, L. J. (2012). The impact of globalisation on the distribution of Echinococcus multilocularis. Trends in Parasitology, 28(6), 239–47.Google Scholar
Davies, Z. G., Fuller, R. A., Dallimer, M., Loram, A. & Gaston, K. J. (2012). Household factors influencing participation in bird feeding activity: A national scale analysis. PLoS ONE, 7(6), e39692.Google Scholar
Decker, D. J., Evensen, D. T., Siemer, W. F., Leong, K. M., Riley, S. J., Wild, M. A., Castle, K. T. & Higgins, C. L. (2010). Understanding risk perceptions to enhance communication about human–wildlife interactions and the impacts of zoonotic disease. ILAR Journal, 51(3), 255–61.Google Scholar
DeVault, T. L., Belant, J. L., Blackwell, B. F. & Seamans, T. W. (2011). Interspecific variation in wildlife hazards to aircraft: Implications for airport wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 35(4), 394–402.Google Scholar
Dickman, A. J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: The importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human–wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation, 13(5), 458–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Lima, C., Marsh, H., Hamann, M., Sinha, A. & Arthur, R. (2014). Positive interactions between Irrawaddy dolphins and artisanal fishers in the Chilika Lagoon of Eastern India are driven by ecology, socioeconomics, and culture. Ambio, 43(5), 614–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dudo, A. D., Dahlstrom, M. F. & Brossard, D. (2007). A risk-related assessment of avian influenza coverage in U.S. newspapers. Science Communication, 28(4), 429–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, B. (2016). Human–wildlife conflicts and the need to include tolerance and coexistence: An introductory comment. Society & Natural Resources, 29, 738–43.Google Scholar
Fuller, R. A., Irvine, K. N., Davies, Z. G., Armsworth, P. R. & Gaston, K. J. (2012). Interactions between people and birds in urban landscapes. Studies in Avian Biology, 45, 249–66.Google Scholar
Goddard, M. A., Dougill, A. J. & Benton, T. G. (2013). Why garden for wildlife? Social and ecological drivers, motivations and barriers for biodiversity management in residential landscapes. Ecological Economics, 86, 258–73.Google Scholar
Gore, M. L. & Knuth, B. A. (2009). Mass media effect on the operating environment of a wildlife-related risk-communication campaign. Journal of Wildlife Management, 73(8), 1407–13.Google Scholar
Gore, M. L., Siemer, W. F., Shanahan, J. E., Schuefele, D. & Decker, D. J. (2005). Effects on risk perception of media coverage of a black bear-related human fatality. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 33(2), 507–16.Google Scholar
Hand, K. L., Freeman, C., Seddon, P. J., Recio, M. R., Stein, A. & van Heezik, Y. (2017). The importance of urban gardens in supporting children’s biophilia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(2), 274–9.Google Scholar
Harihar, A., Chanchani, P., Sharma, R. K., Vattakaven, J., Gubbi, S., Pandav, B. & Noon, B. (2013). Conflating ‘co-occurrence’ with ‘coexistence’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(11), E109.Google Scholar
Harris, S. (1981). The food of suburban foxes (Vulpes vulpes), with special reference to London. Mammal Review, 11, 151–68.Google Scholar
Harris, S. (1985). Humane control of foxes. In Britt, D., ed., Humane Control of Land Mammals and Birds. Potters Bar: UFAW, pp. 63–74.Google Scholar
Hedblom, M., Heyman, E., Antonsson, H. & Gunnarsson, B. (2014). Bird song diversity influences young people’s appreciation of urban landscapes. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13, 469–74.Google Scholar
Hegglin, D., Bontadina, F. & Deplazes, P. (2015).Human–wildlife interactions and zoonotic transmission of Echinococcus multilocularis. Trends in Parasitology, 31(5), 167–73.Google Scholar
Hicks, J. R. (2016). Children as an emotional amplifier in Northern Illinois white-tailed deer interactions. The Journal of Environmental Education, 47(4), 287–95.Google Scholar
Hill, N. J., Carbery, K. A. & Deane, E. M. (2007). Human–possum conflict in urban Sydney, Australia: Public perceptions and implications for species management. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 12(2), 101–13.Google Scholar
Hobbs, S. J. & White, P. C. L. (2016). Achieving positive social outcomes through participatory urban wildlife conservation projects. Wildlife Research, 42(7), 607–17.Google Scholar
Hosaka, T. & Numata, S. (2016). Spatiotemporal dynamics of urban green spaces and human–wildlife conflicts in Tokyo. Scientific Reports, 6, art. 30911.Google Scholar
Hosaka, T., Sugimoto, K. & Numata, S. (2017). Effects of childhood experience with nature on tolerance of urban residents toward hornets and wild boars in Japan. PLoS ONE, 12(4), e0175243.Google Scholar
Jones, D. N. & Reynolds, J. S. (2008). Feeding birds in our towns and cities: A global research opportunity. Journal of Avian Biology, 39, 265–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, B. S., O’Riain, M. J., van Eeden, R. & King, A. J. (2011). A low-cost manipulation of food resources reduces spatial overlap between baboons (Papioursinus) and humans in conflict. International Journal of Primatology, 32(6), 1397–1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kansky, R., Kidd, M. & Knight, A. T. (2014). Meta‐analysis of attitudes toward damage‐causing mammalian wildlife. Conservation Biology, 28(4), 924–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kansky, R., Kidd, M. & Knight, A. T. (2016). A wildlife tolerance model and case study for understanding human wildlife conflicts. Biological Conservation, 201, 137–45.Google Scholar
Kretser, H. E., Sullivan, P. J. & Knuth, B. A. (2008). Housing density as an indicator of spatial patterns of reported human–wildlife interactions in Northern New York. Landscape & Urban Planning, 84, 282–92.Google Scholar
Kurosawa, R., Kanai, Y., Matsuda, M. & Okuyama, M. (2003). Conflict between humans and crows in greater Tokyo: Garbage management as a possible solution. Global Environmental Research, 7(2), 139–48.Google Scholar
Jones, D. N. & Reynolds, J. S.(2008). Feeding birds in our towns and cities: A global research opportunity. Journal of Avian Biology, 39, 265–71.Google Scholar
Leblond, M., Dussault, C., Ouellet, J. P., Poulin, M., Courtois, R. & Fortin, J. (2007). Management of roadside salt pools to reduce moose–vehicle collisions. Journal of Wildlife Management, 71(7), 2304–10.Google Scholar
Leong, K. M. (2009). The tragedy of becoming common: Landscape change and perceptions of wildlife. Society & Natural Resources, 23, 111–27.Google Scholar
Loram, A., Tratalos, J., Warren, P. H. & Gaston, K. J. (2007). Urban domestic gardens (X): The extent & structure of the resource in five major cities. Landscape Ecology, 22, 601–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magle, S. B., Lehrer, E. W. & Fidino, M. (2016). Urban mesopredator distribution: Examining the relative effects of landscape and socioeconomic factors. Animal Conservation, 19, 163–75.Google Scholar
Manfredo, M. J. & Dayer, A. A. (2004). Concepts for exploring the social aspects of human–wildlife conflict in a global context. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 9(4), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manfredo, M. J., Teel, T. L. & Henry, K. L. (2009). Linking society and environment: A multilevel model of shifting wildlife value orientations in the Western United States. Social Science Quarterly, 90(2), 407–27.Google Scholar
McCleery, R. A. (2009). Improving attitudinal frameworks to predict behaviors in human–wildlife conflicts. Society & Natural Resources, 22(4), 353–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinney, M. L. (2008). Effects of urbanization on species richness: A review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosystems, 11(2), 161–76.Google Scholar
McIntosh, D. & Wright, P. A. (2017). Emotional processing as an important part of the wildlife viewing experience. Journal of Outdoor Recreation & Tourism, 18, 1–9.Google Scholar
Morandi, N. & Williams, J. (1997). Snakebite injuries: Contributing factors and intentionality of exposure. Wilderness Environment Medicine, 8(3), 152–5.Google Scholar
Morzillo, A., de Beurs, K. & Martin-Mikle, C. (2014). A conceptual framework to evaluate human–wildlife interactions within coupled human and natural systems. Ecology & Society, 19, art. 44.Google Scholar
Munoz, S. & Nimegeer, A. (2012). Evaluating and Measuring the Impact of Health Promotion Activities in Hospital Grounds. Inverness: Centre for Rural Health, University of the Highlands and Islands.Google Scholar
Nyhus, P. J. (2016). Human–wildlife conflict and coexistence. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 143–71.Google Scholar
Ogra, M. V. (2008). Human–wildlife conflict and gender in protected area borderlands: A case study of costs, perceptions, and vulnerabilities from Uttarakhand (Uttaranchal), India. Geoforum, 39(3), 1408–22.Google Scholar
Plumer, L, Davison, J. & Saarma, U. (2014). Rapid urbanization of red foxes in Estonia: Distribution, behaviour, attacks on domestic animals, and health-risks related to zoonotic diseases. PLoS ONE, 9, e115124.Google Scholar
Poessel, S. A., Gese, E. M. & Young, J. K. (2017). Environmental factors influencing the occurrence of coyotes and conflicts in urban areas. Landscape & Urban Planning, 157, 259–69.Google Scholar
Powell, R. B. & Ham, S. H. (2008). Can ecotourism interpretation really lead to pro-conservation knowledge, attitudes and behaviour? Evidence from the Galapagos Islands. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(4), 467–89.Google Scholar
Ramalho, C. E. & Hobbs, R. J. (2012). Time for a change: Dynamic urban ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27(3), 179–88.Google Scholar
Reynolds, P. C. & Braithwaite, D. (2001). Towards a conceptual framework for wildlife tourism. Tourism Management, 22(1), 31–42.Google Scholar
Sandifer, P. A., Sutton-Grier, A. E. & Ward, B. P. (2015). Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation. Ecosystem Services, 12, 1–15.Google Scholar
Schultz, P. W. (2001). Assessing the structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(4), 1–13.Google Scholar
Seto, K. C., Sánchez-Rodríguez, R. & Fragkias, M. (2010). The new geography of contemporary urbanization and the environment. Annual Review of Environment & Resources, 35, 167–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sha, J. C. M., Gumert, M. D., Lee, B. P.Y.-H., Jones-Engel, L., Chan, S. & Fuentes, A. (2009). Macaque–human interactions and the societal perceptions of macaques in Singapore. American Journal of Primatology, 71, 825–39.Google Scholar
Shanahan, D. F., Bush, R., Gaston, K. J., Lin, B. B., Dean, J., Barber, E. & Fuller, R. A. (2016). Health benefits from nature experiences depend on dose. Scientific Reports, 6, art. 28551.Google Scholar
Shumway, N., Seabrook, L., McAlpine, C. & Ward, P. (2014). A mismatch of community attitudes and actions: A study of koalas. Landscape & Urban Planning, 126, 42–52.Google Scholar
Siemer, W. F., Decker, D. J., Shanahan, J. E. & Wieczorek-Hudenko, H. A. (2014). How do suburban coyote attacks affect residents’ perceptions? Insights from a New York case study. Cities and the Environment (CATE), 7, 7.Google Scholar
Smith, R. M., Gaston, K. J., Warren, P. H. & Thompson, K. (2005). Urban domestic gardens (V): Relationships between land cover composition, housing and landscape. Landscape Ecology, 20(2), 235–53.Google Scholar
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., Koyanagi, T. F., Kurisu, K. & Hanaki, K. (2016a). Urban residents’ perceptions of neighbourhood nature: Does the extinction of experience matter? Biological Conservation, 203, 143–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., Yamaura, Y., Kurisu, K. & Hanaki, K. (2016b). Both direct and vicarious experiences of nature affect children’s willingness to conserve biodiversity. International Journal of Environmental Research & Public Health, 13(6), 529.Google Scholar
Soulsbury, C. D., Baker, P. J., Iossa, G. & Harris, S. (2010). Red foxes (Vulpes vulpes). In Gehrt, S. D., Riley, S. P. D. and Cypher, B. L., eds., Urban Carnivores: Ecology, Conflict, and Conservation. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, pp. 63–75.Google Scholar
Soulsbury, C. D., Iossa, G., Baker, P. J., Cole, N. C., Funk, S. M. & Harris, S. (2007). The impact of sarcoptic mange Sarcoptes scabiei on the British fox Vulpes vulpes population. Mammal Review, 37, 278–96.Google Scholar
Soulsbury, C. D., Iossa, G., Baker, P. J., White, P. C. L. & Harris, S. (2011). Behavioral and spatial analysis of extraterritorial movements in red foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Journal of Mammalogy, 92(1), 190–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soulsbury, C. D. & White, P. C. L. (2015). Human–wildlife interactions in urban areas: A review of conflicts, benefits and opportunities. Wildlife Research, 42(7), 541–53.Google Scholar
Sparkes, J., Ballard, G., Fleming, P. & Brown, W. (2017). Social, conservation and economic implications of rabies in Australia. Australian Zoologist, 38(3), 457–63.Google Scholar
Sponarski, C. C., Vaske, J. J., Bath, A. J. & Loeffler, T. A. (2016). Changing attitudes and emotions toward coyotes with experiential education. Journal of Environmental Education, 47(4), 296–306.Google Scholar
Stewart, K. & Cole, M. (2015). The creation of a killer species. Critical Animal and Media Studies: Communication for Nonhuman Animal Advocacy, 77, 124.Google Scholar
Sun, C., Mingie, J. C., Petrolia, D. R. & Jones, W. D. (2015). Economic impacts of nonresidential wildlife watching in the United States. Forest Science, 61, 46–54.Google Scholar
Teixeira, B., Hirsch, A., Goulart, V. D., Passos, L., Teixeira, C. P., James, P. & Young, R. (2015a). Good neighbours: Distribution of black-tufted marmoset (Callithrix penicillata) in an urban environment. Wildlife Research, 42(7), 579–89.Google Scholar
Teixeira, C. P., Passos, L., Goulart, V. D., Hirsch, A., Rodrigues, M. & Young, R. J. (2015b). Evaluating patterns of human–reptile conflicts in an urban environment. Wildlife Research, 42(7), 570–8.Google Scholar
Thomas, K. L. & Jones, N. D. (1997). Control versus chaos: A unique suburban wildlife conflict in Australia. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2, 50–1.Google Scholar
Treves, A., Naughton‐Treves, L. & Shelley, V. (2013). Longitudinal analysis of attitudes toward wolves. Conservation Biology, 27(2), 315–23.Google Scholar
Treves, A., Wallace, R. B. & White, S. (2009). Participatory planning of interventions to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts. Conservation Biology, 23, 1577–87.Google Scholar
United Nations. (2014). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights. New York: United Nations (ST/ESA/SER.A/352).Google Scholar
Whitaker, P. B. & Shine, R. (1999). When, where and why do people encounter Australian brownsnakes (Pseudonaja textilis: Elapidae)? Wildlife Research, 26(5), 675–88.Google Scholar
White, J. G., Gubiani, R., Smallman, N., Snell, K. & Morton, A. (2006). Home range, habitat selection and diet of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in a semi-urban riparian environment. Wildlife Research, 33(3), 75–180.Google Scholar
White, P. C. L. & Ward, A. I. (2010). Interdisciplinary approaches for the management of existing and emerging human–wildlife conflicts. Wildlife Research, 37(8), 623–9.Google Scholar
White, R. M., Fischer, A., Marshall, K., Travis, J. M., Webb, T. J., Di Falco, S., Redpath, S. M. & Van der Wal, R. (2009). Developing an integrated conceptual framework to understand biodiversity conflicts. Land Use Policy, 26(2), 242–53.Google Scholar
Wine, S., Gagné, S. A. & Meentemeyer, R. K. (2015). Understanding human–coyote encounters in urban ecosystems using citizen science data: What do socioeconomics tell us? Environmental Management, 55(1), 159–70.Google Scholar
Zelenski, J. M., Dopko, R. L. & Capaldi, C. A. (2015). Cooperation is in our nature: Nature exposure may promote cooperative and environmentally sustainable behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 24–31.Google Scholar
Zeppel, H. & Muloin, S. (2008). Conservation benefits of interpretation on marine wildlife tours. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13(4), 280–94.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×