Beyond Human-Wildlife Conflicts. Ameliorating Human/Nonhuman Animal Relationships through Workshops on Terminology

Abstract

Human-Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) occur when nonhuman animals’ needs clash with those of humans. One recent effort regards shifting HWCs into Human-Human Social Conflicts, where conflicts are about humans disagreeing on how to deal with nonhuman animals. This method can help reduce guilt placed on nonhuman animals, but also robs them of their agency. Conversely, some in the field of biology seek to increase animal agency and their moral status, even making them key stakeholders. A helpful relationship may seek both aspects. Fourteen workshops (147 participants, 40 subgroups), with relevant stakeholders, were run on this topic. Participants were involved in biology and/or environmentalism and/or sustainability. They sought to develop terminology diminishing guilt in HWCs, while maintaining agency. Common themes were then brought out. Eight subgroups argued for more inclusive terms, like “sentient beings” and 21 argued for diminishing human/nature dichotomies. Both fit well with increasing agency, and giving nonhumans greater moral status, by narrowing human/nonhuman animal gaps. Participants also discussed nonhuman animals as “icons”, which 26/30 subgroups saw as, at least potentially, problematic, arguing it conceptually “freezes” species, ignoring their dynamism. In sum, the workshops aid in framing healthier relationships with the natural world.