A qualitative examination of the social practices and representations towards a species of endangered tortoise
Irene Pérez A B D , Andrés Giménez A and Andrés Pedreño CA Departamento Biología Aplicada, Área Ecología, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Campus de Elche, Elche 03202, Alicante, Spain.
B Present address: Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity, School of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
C Departamento Sociología y Política Social, Universidad de Murcia, Campus de Espinardo, Espinardo 30100, Murcia, Spain.
D Corresponding author. Email: iperezib@asu.edu
Wildlife Research 38(4) 323-329 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR10209
Submitted: 18 November 2010 Accepted: 1 July 2011 Published: 6 September 2011
Abstract
Context: Understanding how people view, think and talk about wildlife and the link between wildlife and human behaviour are important for wildlife management to be effective. In this paper, we used the notion of social representations to understand people’s behaviour towards wildlife. We qualitatively studied social representations relating to the keeping in captivity of the endangered tortoise Testudo graeca in south-east Spain.
Aims: The aims were to elucidate social representations towards the spur-thighed tortoise, and to understand the link between social representation and the motivations for collecting and keeping tortoises in captivity. We discuss the conservation implications of social representation towards this tortoise species and provide some management recommendations.
Methods: We carried out 13 in-depth interviews with rural–agrarian, urban and neorural dwellers who kept tortoises in captivity to elucidate social representations towards the spur-thighed tortoise and to understand the link between social representation and the motivations for collecting and keeping tortoises.
Key results: The discourse analysis shows that the social representations of this tortoise as a tameable animal, pet and safeguarded animal co-exist in south-east Spain.
Conclusions: The fact that the social reality in south-east Spain has changed from a social–agrarian society to an urban and neorural society seems to explain these social representations. The conservationist discourse espoused by some respondents partly explains why the habit of keeping tortoises in captivity has prevailed despite social changes in recent decades and this activity being prohibited since the 1970s.
Implications: Our findings reveal the utility of the social representation notion in understanding the social dimensions of wildlife conservation and its applicability to wildlife management.
References
Alonso, L. E. (2003). ‘La Mirada Cualitativa en Sociología.’ (Fundamentos: Madrid.)Bruskotter, J. T., Schmidt, R. H., and Teel, T. L. (2007). Are attitudes toward wolves changing? A case study in Utah. Biological Conservation 139, 211–218.
| Are attitudes toward wolves changing? A case study in Utah.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Buijs, A. E. (2009). Lay people’s images of nature: comprehensive frameworks of values, beliefs, and value orientations. Society & Natural Resources 22, 417–432.
| Lay people’s images of nature: comprehensive frameworks of values, beliefs, and value orientations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Buijs, A. E., Fischer, A., Rink, D., and Young, J. C. (2008). Looking beyond superficial knowledge gaps: understanding public representations of biodiversity. International Journal of Biodiversity Science and Management 4, 65–80.
| Looking beyond superficial knowledge gaps: understanding public representations of biodiversity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Buller, H. (2004). Where the wild things are: the evolving iconography of rural fauna. Journal of Rural Studies 20, 131–141.
| Where the wild things are: the evolving iconography of rural fauna.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Camarero, L., Cruz, F., González, M., del Pino, J. A., Oliva, J., and Sampedro, R. (2009). ‘La Población Rural de España. De los Desequilibrios a la Sostenibilidad Social.’ Colección Estudios Sociales No. 27. (Fundación La Caixa: Barcelona.)
Castro, P. (2006). Applying social psychology to the study of environmental concern and environmental worldviews: contributions from the social representations approach. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 16, 247–266.
| Applying social psychology to the study of environmental concern and environmental worldviews: contributions from the social representations approach.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T., and Bonney, R. (2007). Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society 12, 11.
Corbetta, P. (2003). ‘Social Research: Theory, Methods and Techniques.’ (Sage Publications: London.)
Dietz, T., Stern, P. C., and Guagnano, G. A. (1998). Social structural and social phychological bases of environmental concern. Environment and Behavior 30, 450–471.
| Social structural and social phychological bases of environmental concern.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fanini, L., and Fahd, S. (2009). Storytelling and environmental information: connecting schoolchildren and herpetofauna in Morocco. Integrative Zoology 4, 188–195.
| Storytelling and environmental information: connecting schoolchildren and herpetofauna in Morocco.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fulton, D. C., Manfredo, M. J., and Lipscomb, J. (1996). Wildlife value orientations: a conceptual and measurement approach. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 1, 24–47.
Giménez, A., Esteve, M. A., Pérez, I., Anadón, J. D., Martínez, M., Martínez, J., and Palazón, J. A. (2004). ‘La tortuga mora en la Región de Murcia: Conservación de una especie amenazada.’ (DM Librero Editor: Murcia, Spain.)
Hovardas, T., and Stamou, G. P. (2006). Structural and narrative reconstruction of rural residents’ representations of ‘nature’, ‘wildlife’, and ‘landscape’. Biodiversity and Conservation 15, 1745–1770.
| Structural and narrative reconstruction of rural residents’ representations of ‘nature’, ‘wildlife’, and ‘landscape’.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Inglehart, R., and Baker, W. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review 65, 19–51.
| Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jacobson, E. R. (1993). Implications of infectious diseases for captive propagation and introduction programs of threatened/endangered reptiles. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 24, 245–255.
Jacobson, E. R. (1994). Causes of mortality and disease in tortoises: a review. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 25, 2–17.
Jones, R. E., and Dunlap, R. E. (1992). The social bases of environmental concern: have they changed over time? Rural Sociology 57, 28–47.
| The social bases of environmental concern: have they changed over time?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lowe, G. D., and Pinhey, T. K. (1982). Rural-urban differences in support for environmental protection. Rural Sociology 47, 114–128.
Manfredo, M. J. (2009). ‘Who Cares About Wildlife?: Social Science Concepts for Exploring Human-Wildlife Relationships and Conservation Issues.’ (Springer: New York.)
Manfredo, M. J., and Zinn, H. C. (1996). Population change and its implications for wildlife management in the new west: a case study of Colorado. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 1, 62–74.
Manfredo, M. J., Teel, T. L., and Bright, A. D. (2003). Why are public values toward wildlife changing? Human Dimensions of Wildlife 8, 287–306.
| Why are public values toward wildlife changing?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Michel-Guillou, E., and Moserb, G. (2006). Commitment of farmers to environmental protection: from social pressure to environmental conscience. Journal of Environmental Psychology 26, 227–235.
| Commitment of farmers to environmental protection: from social pressure to environmental conscience.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Moscovici, S. (1961). ‘La Psychanalyse, son Image et son Public.’ (Presses Universitaires de France: Paris.)
O’Rourke, E. (2000). The reintroduction and reinterpretation of the wild. Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Ethics 13, 144–165.
| The reintroduction and reinterpretation of the wild.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pérez, I., Giménez, A., Sánchez-Zapata, J. A., Anadón, J. D., Martínez, M., and Esteve, M. A. (2004). Non-commercial collection of spur-thighed tortoises (Testudo graeca graeca): a cultural problem in southeast Spain. Biological Conservation 118, 175–181.
| Non-commercial collection of spur-thighed tortoises (Testudo graeca graeca): a cultural problem in southeast Spain.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pérez, I., Giménez, A., and Pedreño, A. (2010). ‘Dimensión Social de la Conservación de la Fauna: la Tortuga Mora.’ (Editum Ediciones de la Universidad de Murcia: Murcia, Spain.)
Schwartz, T. S., and Karl, S. A. (2006). Population and conservation genetics of the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus). Conservation Genetics 6, 917–928.
| Population and conservation genetics of the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shine, R., and Koenig, J. (2001). Snakes in the garden: an analysis of reptiles ‘rescued’ by community-based wildlife carers. Biological Conservation 102, 271–283.
| Snakes in the garden: an analysis of reptiles ‘rescued’ by community-based wildlife carers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Smith, M. D., and Krannich, R. S. (2000). ‘Culture clash’ revisited: newcomer and longer-term residents’ attitudes toward land use, development, and environmental issues in rural communities in the Rocky Mountain West. Rural Sociology 65, 396–421.
| ‘Culture clash’ revisited: newcomer and longer-term residents’ attitudes toward land use, development, and environmental issues in rural communities in the Rocky Mountain West.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Teel, T. L., and Manfredo, M. J. (2010). Understanding the diversity of public interests in wildlife conservation. Conservation Biology 24, 128–139.
| Understanding the diversity of public interests in wildlife conservation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tremblay, K. D. J., and Dunlap, R. E. (1978). Rural-urban residence and concert with environmental quality: a replication and extension. Rural Sociology 43, 479–491.
Williams, C. K., Ericsson, G., and Heberlein, T. A. (2002). A quantitative summary of attitudes toward wolves and their reintroduction (1972–2000). Wildlife Society Bulletin 30, 575–584.
Zinn, H. C., Manfredo, M. J., Vaske, J. J., and Wittmann, K. (1998). Using normative beliefs to determine the acceptability of wildlife management actions. Society & Natural Resources 11, 649–662.
| Using normative beliefs to determine the acceptability of wildlife management actions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zinn, H. C., Manfredo, M. J., and Barro, S. C. (2002). Patterns of wildlife value orientations in hunters’ families. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 7, 147–162.
| Patterns of wildlife value orientations in hunters’ families.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
