Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBavin, D
dc.contributor.authorMacPherson, J
dc.contributor.authorCrowley, SL
dc.contributor.authorMcDonald, RA
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-08T16:07:45Z
dc.date.issued2023-03-29
dc.date.updated2023-12-08T15:09:22Z
dc.description.abstractConservation translocations are complex and challenging, but are frequently employed to tackle biodiversity decline. Large predator translocations can be particularly emotive and contentious, in part because they present actual or perceived risks to the safety and livelihoods of people. Understanding the social feasibility of conservation translocations is imperative, and provides opportunities to identify and address these risks. In Britain, the Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx is the most frequently raised prospect for large carnivore reintroduction. We used Q-Methodology to explore stakeholder perspectives on the prospect of lynx reintroduction to Scotland. We identified five perspectives: Lynx for Change was supportive of lynx reintroduction, feeling that lynx could facilitate ecosystem restoration. Lynx for Economy was also supportive, anticipating economic benefits to local communities. No to Lynx was strongly opposed, perceiving that humans were fulfilling the roles of absent large carnivores. Scotland is not Ready supported the conversation but perceived prohibitive socio-ecological barriers. We are not Convinced was not satisfied that an adequate case for biodiversity gain had been made, but was open to further exploration of the potential. There were important areas of divergence among the perspectives over the potential impacts on sheep farming and the degree to which environments should be managed by people or encouraged to self-regulate. There was a consensus on a lack of trust between stakeholder groups, which was primarily rooted in participants' experiences of previous wildlife reintroductions and the contemporary management of recovering predators. However, there was also consensus that, should lynx reintroduction continue to be explored, a participatory, cross-sectoral approach could address these trust issues, help manage existing and emergent conflicts, and build knowledge collaboratively. We provide a foundation for future dialogue between stakeholders over the prospective reintroduction of the lynx to Scotland and recommend a stakeholder-focused participatory process as the next step. Our findings have wider relevance for wildlife reintroductions, species recovery and conservation conflicts elsewhere. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipScotland: The Big Pictureen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipTrees For Lifeen_GB
dc.format.extent950-967
dc.identifier.citationVol. 5(3), pp. 950-967en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10465
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/134761
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-4854-0925 (Crowley, Sarah L)
dc.identifierScopusID: 56658383600 (Crowley, Sarah L)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-6922-3195 (McDonald, Robbie A)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWiley / British Ecological Societyen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4qrfj6qfcen_GB
dc.rights© 2023 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_GB
dc.subjectconservation translocationen_GB
dc.subjectLynxen_GB
dc.subjectQ methoden_GB
dc.subjectreintroductionen_GB
dc.subjectsocial feasibilityen_GB
dc.subjectstakeholder consultationen_GB
dc.titleStakeholder perspectives on the prospect of lynx Lynx lynx reintroduction in Scotlanden_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2023-12-08T16:07:45Z
dc.identifier.issn2575-8314
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Wiley via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.descriptionData availability statement: The data used for this study are publicly available on Dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.4qrfj6qfcen_GB
dc.identifier.eissn2575-8314
dc.identifier.journalPeople and Natureen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofPeople and Nature, 5(3)
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-02-06
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2023-03-29
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2023-12-08T16:05:56Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2023-12-08T16:07:49Z
refterms.panelBen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2023-03-29


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2023 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2023 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.