conseniation planning for wolves and brount bears

MEI\IORJALUNIVERSITYOF NEWFOUNDLAND GEOGRAPHY DEPARTMENT

Understanding the role attitudes could play

conseniation planning for wolves and brount bears

Abruz zo, Lazio and Molise National Park, Italy

By

©jenn y AnneGlikma n j.a.l'likm an@mun.ca

Athesis subm itted 10the Schoo lof GraduateStud iesin parl ial fulfillmenl ofthe req u irem en tsforthedegree of

Doctorof Philosop hy

Geograp hy Department Memo rialUn ive rsity

jllly 2011

St. john's,NewfollndJand

- -

Abstract

\Volf andbrownbearpopulationsa~e expand ingthrou gh ou t Eu rope,ina humandominatedlands cape.Conse rva tionofthesetwo specie s willbe determin edbythe altitudesof thosewholiveclosetothem.UnlikeinNorth Amer ica,human dimensions (H D) rega rdin ghuman- wildlif eissu esrem ain s a relativelynewfieldofresearchinEu rope,andeve n mor esoin Italy.This isthe firststu dyof HDin wolfandbearmanagem entin Italy .

Thisdissertati onhas focus edonunderstand inghow the attitu des0fthos e livingincloseprox im itytoboth~olves andbears can play aroleinach ieving conse rva tion plannin g.

Att itude sarcpositiveornegat ive evalua tio nsof anobject- in this case wol vesorbears-andare amental state com posed byaffective(feelings), cognitive (beliefs)andbeha vioura l intentio ncom pone nts.Eachcom po ne n tof attit ude plays a role in the conser vationof wolv es and brown bears.TIle objectivesof thisstudy wer etolook in detailatthesethree com ponents,how they can belinked,andhow they contribute to conse rva tion. Quantitative face- to-face(11=1611)intervi ew s werecarriedout todetermine attitud es ofresid ent s towardwolvesand bear sintheAbruzzo,Lazio,and Molise NationalPark (PN ALM)and the surro und ing buffer zone.

Th is dissert ati ondem onst rat edthatthemajority ofresidentsinthe PNALM are willingto coexist withtheselarge carnivo res.Parti cipants expresse d

posit ivefeelingstow ard wolvesand bears,theytolerat edtheperceivcd dam ages callsed, and theysu ppor t the ma intenanceand prot ection of both species-but especiallyof brownbears . Th is dissert ati on showe d thatresidentshav e ahigh er level of knowl ed geabou t bea rs,which result sinstronge r positi vefeelin gs.

These areimport antmessagesto comm unica te tomanager sresp onsible forthe conserva tionofwolves and brown bears.Em phas izing thesepositive findings can bethe sta rting point for constru ctiv ed ialogu e onconserva tion.Th is study,ther efore,setsthedirection forfuturepublicinvolvementproccssesThe nextHDstep wouldbeto organizeworksh op swithallinter est gro ups(e .g.

she phe rds,hunters,non-l ocals),tobringthemtogeth er andtoworkwiththem ontheircom mo na litiesto crea teamana gem entplan for wolvesand bea rs

Keyw ord s: Apen ninebrownbear conse rvation,att itudes,beliefs,human dime nsions,Ita ly,knowled ge,nati on alpark,publicinvolvem ent,wildlife managem ent,wolf con serv at ion.

Dedication

ToIllyHlIs/lillllftha! lnietill thisretnotcistnnd and101IlY !lIll1re soll ll'ho glll'elllelhe!oClIs loji llisllIIIisdissertatioiI011 lillie

Ackn ow led gements

\Vriting aPhDinvolvesfou r yearsofou r lives,and manypeople around usthatpass by,go or stay .Itisha rdto includeallof them.

Therearemanypeopl etoacknow ledgeduringthewholeprocessofaPhD, and ingene ral during ourlen gth of life.

WhenI thin kabo utacknowledgements,im me d iately I thin kaboutmy parents,who gave melife.Theyenco urageme eve rydaytopursu emydreams, and their sup port helpsmakethemhappen .

Iam lucky becau seI have alreadyaccom plishedone dreamofmylife:t0 find theperfectcompanionwith whomto makeall the othe r dreams come true.I wouldalso liketothan khimin hel pingmein the G.I.S.mapdesigninthis

Spec ialthankstoan anonym ousdonorthatmadethis wholeproject possible.Intheprofession alacademicrealm,Iamvcrythank fulto LuigiBoitani and Paolo Ciucciwhoallowed meto embarkon theproject ofhuman dimension s,andmysuperviso rAlistair Bathwhotaughtmewhathuman dimens ionsis and howtodoit.Iamgrateful toJerry Vaske,whokind ly and patientlytaught menewsta tisticalana lyses.Igreatlyap preciated theinsights andcom mentsofmyPhDcommi ttee(Ratana ChuenpagdecandArnKeeling) thatmadethisdissertationmore com plete.

r..

'M,." ",0 ''''''",

I andlocal residents wh ohelp edinthedevelopm ent ofthequestionn aire durin g

theinitial qualitativephase,and theircontinuedsu p po rtofthisstudy, lam fortu natetohave colleagues a round mewho arealsogreatfrientis suchasBeatr iceFrank,MariajoseBarragan,Maggie Sutherland.VesnaKer ezi andCarlyS po narski.Particularthanks gotoBeatriceFra nk withwh om Ishared theseyearsofPhDandlife.la mreally glad that shefoundaprojectthatbrought herto St.John'sat the same timeasme.Icould havenever madeitwitho ut her.

Last bu tnotleast,thank youtoall ofmyfriends andrelative saroundthe globethatgivemehapp iness outsidetheuniversityworld.

Table of content

Ack now ledge me nts

Listof Fig u res

LislofAb brevia tio nsan dsym bo ls

Glossa ryofmainconcepts ListofAppe n dices

Co-a ulho rs hipsla leme n l

Partt:Backgrou nd of theResear ch

2.1. Human dimensionsand itshisto ry 2.2. Human dimensi onsandgeogra phy 2.3. Human dimensi onsinconse rva tio n progr am context 2.-1. Human dimen sionsand parti cip ati onin decision-makin g 2.5. Human dimensi ons and thenature of attitudes

Resear ch goal andobjectives Stu dyarea 4.1. Flor a an d faun a

-1.2. Kingsand bear s:the originof thenati on alpark

~:~: ~~~~:~~~::~~:::k

4.5. StudyzonesoftheHD resear ch

7 11 14 17 20 25

32 36 38 40 41

5.2. Dataana lysis

Pari II:Paper s

51 54

Paper 1:Human dimension sof wildlifeinEu ro p e: the Italianwa y 76 8. Paper2:The influen ceof folkloreand cuItural practic esin under standingrural attitudestoward Apennine wolves KrnnsIIII'us ita licus) and Apenn in ebrown bear s(Ursll s ar cto slIIa rS;CaIJIIs) 100 9. Paper 3: The moderatin ginfluence of knowled geon feelin gs,beli efs

an d normativebel iefsaboul wolves an d bears 132

10. Paper4: Segme nti ng normativ ebeli efsregardingwolfand brown bea r

managementoption sinCen lral Ital y 165

13. Appendixl:Th equestionnair e

List of Tables

Tab le5.1.1Samp li ng frame for Abruzz ol\Iarsi ca 46

Ta ble5.1.2Sam pli ng frame forMoli se 47

Ta ble5.1.3Sam pli ng fram e for Lazio 47

Table 5.1.4Sam pli ng frame fo r Abruzz o Fuci no 47

Table 7.1Fre q ue ncie s of type sofHD docum ent s fo r Italy 84 Table7.2Freq ue nci es ofthemesin HD documents for Italy 86 Ta ble8.1.Paired sa rnp le t-testresult s on attitud inal items' 110 Ta ble9.1 Descr iptiv e statistics and reliabilityanalyses for wol ves 144 Ta bJe9.2 Descripti ve statis tics and reliab ili ty analyses forbears 145

Ta ble9.3Descrip ti vestatisticsfor knowled ge 146

Tab le 10.1.Descripti ve statis tics andrelia b ili ty analysesfor wolves 180 Table 10.2.Descrip tive statistics and reliabilityanalyse sfor be ars 181 Table 10.3.Acceptability ofwolfmanagem ent actio ns for three clust er s 183 Table10.4.Acceptabilityof bear managem entactionsfortw o clusters 183

Table10.5.Relationshipbetween clust erfor wolves 185

Tab le 10.6.Relationship between clust erfor bears 187

Listof Figure s

Figure 2.5. Thecognitive hierar ch ymod el of human behavio ur 23

Figure 4.Locati on ofPN ALMin Italy 30

Fig ure4.1.1Tradi tio na l tra lt uri (tra ils) 33

Figure 4.1.2 Ape n n ine brown bear 34

Figure 4.1.3Apenn in ewolf 35

Figure 4.3.1 Thefourzones withinthepark 38

Figure 4.3.2 Exampleof thefou r zonesof PNA LM 40

Figure 4.5S tu dyzo neso f the PNA LM 42

Figur e 7.1.Nu m berof HOW slud iesin Euro pe betw een 1995and2009 80 Figu re 7.2.lnter esl grou ps invol vedper speciesstu die d 87 Figure8.1.Percenl age ofaltitudeslo wardwolv es and bro wnbear s 109

Figu re9.1.Theo re tical fram ew ork 137

Figu re9.2 Pathana lys is modelfor wolves 148

Figur e 9.3Pathana lysis model for bear s 148

Listof Abbreviationsandsymbols PNALM-Abruzzo,Lazio andMolise NationalPark

LCIE-Large Carn ivoreInitiativefor Europe TRA-Th eor yofReasonAction

Glossar yof main concepts

Alfi'cUllecomponentof altitudeconsists of feelings,moods,emotions,and sym pathetic nervou s systemactiv itythatpeopleexperienceinrelationto an object(e.g.wolf/bear )(EaglyandCha iken, 1993;Brighta ndManfredo,1996).

Attitudesarepositi veor negative evaluationsofanobject,suchaswolvesor bears,andare ament alstatereflected byaffectivc (feelings), cogn itive(beliefs) andbehaviou ral intentioncom ponen ts(EaglyandChaiken,1993;Verplankenct al.,1998;Cookeand Sheeran,2004).

Bd llll'iollmJintentionis aperson'sbeliefabouthowhe /shewillbehaveina specific sihla tion(Manfredo,2008).Forexam ple:"IbeliefIwouldsupport the com pletelyprotectionof wolf/bear" .

Cognitirecomponentointtituaerefersto beliefsandthoug htspeoplehold aboutan object (e.g.,wolf/bear),andrepr esentstheinform at ion anindivid ualposs esses aboutanobjectwhich may ormaynotbetrue(Ostrom,1969;Eaglyand Chaicken,1993).

Mediatorisa variabletha t accounts fo rtherelati onsh ipbetweenthepred ictor(or indep endent variable) andthe crite rion(o rdepend en t variable)(Baronand Kenny,1986).

Moderatoris avariablethataffectsthedirectionand/orstrengthoftherelation bet weenthepredictor(e.g,perceivedamagebelief)andacriter ionvariable(e.g.

su pport protection towardwolf/bear)(BaronandKenny,1986).

Nornuttircbdhf saredefinedaspersonaljudgments about what isappropriatein specificsituations (VaskeandWhittak er,2004).Forexam ple:"Wolf/bea r shou ld rema incompletelyprotected[i.e.Tfshould beillegaltokill them)".

Va/uesaredefinedasenduringbeliefso rme ntalcons tructsthatrefleetour evaluationofou rfundam ental desires of specificmodesofcond uc torthe end statesthatdefinewhatisimpo rtantforus,suchasfamily,fairness(Rokeach, 1973;Fu ltonetal.,1996;Deckcr etal.iXnll).

List of Appendices

Append ixI:Thl'llucst ionnair c

Co-authorshipstatem en t

From this d issertation,twopa pe rs havebeenw ritten incollabora tionwith otherpeop le. Inbothofthesepap ers,the candid atewasthefirstand corre spondingautho r and theiden tifieroftheresearchprop osal. The candida te perf ormedtheana lysisonallsamp les,interpr etedthedataandwrotethe manuscript.Theco-au thors contribu ted totheplanningof thearticles,and help edinda tainterpretationand manuscript evalua tion.

Thefirstmanuscript "Human dimensionsofwildlifeinEurope: The Italianway,"wasa collabo rativeeffortwith BeatriceF.Frank.Thisarticlehas beenaccep ted tobepublishedin theHumanDimens ion ofWildlifcIourn al\'01.

16( 5)2 011.

The othercollabora tivemanuscr ipt, "Segmen ting norma tivebeliefs rega rd ingwolfman agem entinCen tralItaly,"wasbasedon thepaperpresent ed

and Dr.Jerry Vaske.Thismanuscrip thasbeenpublishedin Human Dimension ofWildlifeJoll rnal voI. 15(5) 20l 0 :3~7-358.

PartI:Back groundoftheResearch

1.Ove rvi ew ofthedissert atio n

Sapie nzaUnive rsityofRom e,Memorial Unive rsity,andthe AbruzzoLazioand MoliscNationaI Par k (PNALI\I).The ovcrar ching goal ofthep rojcct isto achicvc conservationof wolv es andbrownbear sinsidethepark~ndin the surround ing bufferzon e.\VithinthisprojL">Ct,bothhuma n need s andbiophys icaIaspectsarc investigat ed astheyrelatetothe conservationof brownbearsandwolves.

Unde rsta nd ing thesocialscien ce or human dimensions (HD)componentof conservation isthethemeforthisdissert ationrcsearch. Specifically.fhescop c of th isdissertation istocom p rehe nd theroleof attitudesinthe conservationof

HD resear chfocuseson understand ingatt itudes,perception andbeliefs, and identifyin gtyp es ofconflict andsteps tow a rd conflictresolu tion{Dccke ret al.,2001).ln<l",,<I,aHD project isbuiltthroughpartner sh ipswithavari ety of interest grou ps, develo pedbywor kingtow ar dunder standin gtheissues.

Mon.·o vcr,H Dr esear ch canhelpmanagersidentify ar eas of supp o rt fordiffer ent man agem en toptio nsand tar ge t speci ficwea knesses inthe kno w ledgethat

Anessentia laspt.~tof research li ke thisis thesha ringofresu lts w iththe academiccomm unity,andparticularlywith thos ewhodirectlyparti cipatedin prod ucing the results(Stronenetal.,2007) .Thisdissertatio nisorganized ina manu scr ipt -based forma tas one mean sto facilitate thedissemi nati on ofthe outcomesofthis study.

Tohelpthe reader link thepap ers,severalcom mo nsectio nsareincluded inthedissertati on:anintro d uc tion;research ques tio nsandobjectives: stu dyarea cha racteristics;meth od sused ; anda generalconclusio n.Theread erwilldiscover throu ghoutthethesistheunderlytng conncc tioubetweenfourinfer-related field s: geogra phy,folklor e, conserva tion biology,and humandimensionsThesc disciplines cove rcompleme ntaryasp ectsregard ingwolves and bears.For example,it was,analyzedhow attit udes are influen cedbymyths and legends, butalsohow attitu des aredrivenby speci fic biologicalaspects of the species themselves (e.g.wolves killingmore shee p than they consu me),and howthe man a gem entofwolv es andbearscha ngesspa tially.Fu rthermo re,someof the top ics ofthesediscip lines and themeth od s appliedoverlap:Litera turefrom thesefou rin ter-re lated field shasbeen inco rp o rat ed tocontrib uteto commu nica tionbetween thesedisciplin esin wild lifemanageme ntissues.

Thcoverarchinggoa lof this disse rta tion is to unde rstandthc ro Ie attitudes playinachievingconservationplanningof wolvesand brownbears.

Three scientificpapers were produced to answe r this research quest ion,with

eachofthemhighli ghti ngdifferent aspectsof theissues (e.g.perceived darn age, protectionof pred ators)rega rdin g wolvesand brownbear sin thePNALI\lThe leitm otif of eachofthese articlesistheunderstan d in g of specificcharacteristics of attitu destowa rdthesetwospecies.Attitudesare mad eupof threecomponents:

affective(i.e.,likingor d islikingof thespecies),cognitive(L e.,beliefsa bo ut the spec ies),behav iou ral intenli on (i.e.,wha t peo ple say theywillsuppor f/oppose or dounder a givensitua tion)(Ostro m,1969;Kotha nda pa ni, 1971;Fishbeinand Ajzen,1975; Ajzen,2001).Relati vely fewstu dieshave com pa red wolvesand bro wnbear s simu ltaneo us ly (KelIert et al.,1996;Breitenm oser,]998;Tecl eta l., 2002;Kleive net al.,20()~;Bathetal.,2008),andnon ehaveexamined the three com ponen ts ofa ttitu dcsin the samedocument .Thecom pone ntsof attitud ehave beeninves tigated in this dissertationresearch,and findingsarepresented using stati stical ana lysesthatarerelati velynewforthe fieldofHD.

HD research is relativelynew inEuropeandeven more so in Italy.The need tound erstan ddevelopm ent of this field(incIu d ing how ma nystudiesh ave been com pleted toda te,andon wha t top ics) isinvesti gatedin thefirstpa perof thisd issertation. "H II11lflll dil/1£'llsiOllso!u¹iJdlijeiIlElIrope:Tllelttll itllllm y"provides anoverviewof HfrinEu ropeandusesthecase studyof Italytohighlightthe difficulti es ofconducting a reviewin this field.Thepapersu mmar izesthro ugha bibliomet ric analysis(Tague-Su tcliffe,1992; Schne iderandBorl u n d,200~)alIthe worksthathavebeen retrievedin Italyuntil2009,andevaluatesthe

implementationof thefield ofHD inEurope.TIleforma tofthis papermeetsthe requiremen tsoftheHuman0;1I/(' 11S;0 I1Sof W;ldlife Jourl/al,theleadingjournalof HD researchinwild lifeman agement.

Thesecondpaperfocuses on theaffectivecom ponentofatt itudes.The strengthof theaffectivecom ponent,whether positiv e ornegative,suggestsnot onlypersistency,bu talsotendstobe a strongpred ictorofthethird atti tude componen t.behaviouralintention(Prislin,1996;Verplankenetal.,1998).In addition,thedifferencesbetw eenthetw ospecies forthe othertwo com ponen ts ofatt itude s(cognitiveandbehaviouralinten tion)wer einves tiga ted.Direct compa risonbetw eenwolves and bears,inrega rdtoresiden ts'level of fear,as wellas consentwith respecttomanagementoptions,isdiscussed. Inthearticle,

"Tlte;llfllleHce o!! olkloremldclIltllrnlpmct;({'s;llllllderstmufillgruml attitlldl'stOll'flrd Apcnninettolres(CanisIllplls)all/i A pe1l11;11l'hrOlI11lhmrs(Ur slls nrcois mursicnnous), "

differencesintheattitudestowar dthetwolargecarnivoresarelinked tothe literaturefromother disciplinar y areas(i.e.,folklore).This discussionhelpsto expand theunder standingofatti tude s.Thispaperhasbeenwritten inaformat compa tiblewiththerequ irementsofthejournalSociety111ld Aninta15.

l1lcthirdpaperfocuses onthesecond comp onentofattitudes:cognitive beliefs.Theroleofknowledgeasmoderatorbetw eenperceivedim pact beliefof damage(the othercognitivebelief)and thefeelingstow ardthesetwo species (affectivecompo nent) is inves tigated.Inaddition,theconnectionbetwe enthe

three com ponentsofattitudesisexploredbyexaminingwheth ertheperceived impactbelief of damage(cognitive com ponent) and bythefeelingstowardthese twospecies (a ffectivecom po ne nt) predi ctstheintentionto su ppo rtvario us managementop tions to wardwolves andbears (normativ ebeliefs).Two mod els, usin gpathana lysis basedonmultip leregressionanalyses,areconstructed w ith theovera rchingobjective bein gtoexaminewhetherthesamemodeIappliesto

brownbear sand wolves,Thispaperistitled"T1IeModemtil/gIl/jll/Cllel' of Kllowkdge011Fl'f'lillgs,Bt'lh1sandNon natiivBl'1iefsabou!Woll 'l'SandBears."This paperhasbeenwritteninaformatcom pa tiblewiththerequir em entsfor El/ropenl/fol//'Ilnlof Wildlifl' Resenre1l,

Thethirdcompone ntofattitudeis investiga ted in thefourthand final article.Trad itionally,managershave focusedattentio nonunderstandingthe differ en cesbetween gro u p membership (e.g.hunter s and non-hunters),butas thesein terestgro ups needtowo rktogether forconserva tion purposes,itis irnportanttofocu s onpossiblesim iIarities.Forthepurposes ofthispaper,the gene ral public was segmentedbytheirnormativebeliefsto sup portoroppose wolfand brownbear managem ent options,and thenthe characte risticsofthe resp ond ent swere examined.Th is offerswild lifemanagersmorespeci fic inform ation about thesizeof thesegments andthedegree of controve rsythat cou ld be expected. Th ispap eristitled, " $l'gll/el/til/gl/ orllllltil'l'l'd il'fsrl'gnrdil/gll'olf

a n dbcnrn t a na gc m c n tillc e nt m lI t n u],"Thispap erhas beenwrittenina format compa tiblewiththerequirem ents ofHUIIUlIIOilllC IlS ;OI1Sof Wildlife[ourna],

2.Introduction

Thischapterbriefly describ esthebackgroundcontextofthe cu rre nt resea rch.First,thehistor y ofhuma n d irnens ions (HD)and the connection s ofthis fieldwithgeographyand conservation are explored.Next,th enatureof attituues within theHDdisciplineand theprocess of publicinvolvementarediscussed.

Thepurposeof thischapter istofamili arizethereaderwiththeoricsandissucs su rround ingHDofw ild life.

2.1.Huma n dimension sanditshistory

AllinLeopold,conside red thefounder ofwildlifemanagem entinNorth Ame rica, statedin 19-13that themanagementofdeer was moreaboutmanaging peoplethan an imals(Flader,1973).In thelate19405. Fran k H.Kingrecognized theneedforresearchintotheHDof wildlifemanagement,in particularthe imp ortanceofunderstand ingtheknowl edgeofthe pub lic,inorder todevelopa com pre hensiveconse rvationprogram(King,19-18).Theearliest attemptsofHl) res e<lrch focusedon publicrelationshipsand prov idededucation tothe citi zens.

In 1955,the U'S.FishandWild life Service imp lemen tedoneofthefirsl nati on alsu rveys,whichisstillcond uc tedeveryfiveyears.Thepurpose ofthis study wasto trackAme ricans'wildlife-associatedrecreationparticipationand economicexpenditures(Manfredoet aI.,2009).Theinvestigation sprimarily focusedon measur ing attitudesandsocio-demo gra phiccharacteristicsofhunters

andang lers(Gigliott iand Decker,1992;Deckeretal.,1996a;Manfredo,2( 08), and wer e carriedou t underlabels othe r thanHD(Bath,1996;Bath,1998).At that time,stand ardmeth odswerenot recogn ized .Only in themid-1960sdid HD in wild life resear chreallybegin (Manfredo,1989).

Theterm"human dimensions"ofwildlife was firstintroduce dbyHend ee

Resour ces Conference (Hend ee andSchoe nfe ld,1973;Manf red o, 2( 08).111efield ofHDinwild lifemana gem entfocu ses on understandin ghow peoplevalue wildlife,on understand ingpublicsup po rtorop position toman agementactions, and011workin gwith peoplewho areaffectedby,orcanaffect,wildlifedecisions [Decke ret al.iXlOl).Professi on alman ager smayhaveadifferent setof prioriti es andideas thanthe genera l public abo ut howtomana gewildlife (Keller t,20(0), thus,learning abo ut the atti tud es and op in ion s ofthe gen eralpu blici s imp ortant for effectivewild life man agem ent (Blanchar d,2000;Ericsso net al.,200~).The goalo f HD resear chisto assist man ager s in under stand ing andevaluating public inte res t inwild life,to prod uceinform ati ontohelp inconflictresolution,and to design and implern entprogram s fo r publ icpa rticipation(~"f anfred o ctal.,1996).

Duringthe1970sthefield ofHDevolvedandexpa nde d tolook at attitudes,percepti on s,andenviro nme nta lvalues [Kellett,1976,Dun lapandVan Liere,1978).Themain actors of investi gati onswer ethedirectusers ofnatur al resourcessuchashun tersandang lers,theirlevel ofsatisfactionand their

willing ncss topay foraccess inga resource,a nd theecol1omic impacts(t\ 1anfrcdo, 1989; Bath,1998;Manfred oetal.,1998;Deckeretal.,20l1l;Manfredo,2008;

Manfr ed o et al., 20( 9).lndecision-m akin g,inputfromdirectusers (e.g.hunters) wasthefirsttobe soug htou t,not only becausethe direct user s showedgreatest concernfor theresource,butalso because ofthephilosoph y of"wiseuse"

managem en tthat wasdrivin g conserva tionand managem ent at thattime (Deckere ta l.,1996a).

Theestablishmentof the env ironme ntal movement broug hta shiftin values.The rewasadecreasein utilita rian values and recogniti on ofthe intrins ic valueofwildlife bynon -consum pt iveusers(Decker etal.,1996b).Thisfur the r complicatedthe situa tio n for wild lifeagencies thathadtodeal witha greater dive rsityofinterest groups,so meofwhich had conflicting values andideas about ho wtomanage naturalresources.\Viththis challenge, HDwaspush edto grow intoa morefo rmalorga nization.Inthe ea rly 1970s,thefirstacade mic recognitionofthe fieldarrivedwith theestablishme ntofaHumanDimensio n Resea rchUnitatCornellUnive rsity(Deckeretal.,20()]).Duringthesameperiod, the first publish ed surveyassessingatti tudes to wa rd wolveswa5cond uctedat theMinneso taStateFair(Joh nso n,1974 as repor tedin William s etal.,2( 02).

Du ring thelate1980s,the em phasisof themajo rity ofHD researchwason largecarnivores, particularly wolves andgrizzlybears .Theinterest in large carnivo res,particularlywolves,emergedduetocontro versyove rwolf

J

rest orati onwithinYellows toneNationa l ParkandtheRockyMou ntain ecosys temsof thewesternUnitedSta tes(Bath, 1989iBath and Buchanan,1989i Tuc kerand Plets ch er,1989). Theconce p tofnaturehasbeen resha pe d by Ll.S, society.Wol ves wereoncea sym bol ofawildern essthatwasperceived negati vely; aswilde rne sssta rted tobe viewe d positiv ely,wolves alsobecamea moreposit ive sym bol.

In the1990s,alar geamount of HDresear ch continue dtofocu s on att itudes towa rd grizzlybears,confronta tions betw eenhuman s andbea rs (Bath, 1994),andallitudesto wardwolv es andwolf restorati on(Bath,1991;Brigh t and Manfredo,1996;Pateeta l.,1996;Bath,1998; Williamse lal.,20lJ2).In 1996,the HUllltlllDill/elisions of Wildlife [ournn!wasestablishe d to comm un icateadvances in HD theory,meth ods andcasestudies.This journ al was aclear sign thatHD had become not onlyanap plied scien cebutalsoanacade mica llyrecogn ized disciplineworld wid e.

From thisbriefintrodu ction,it is possibletoidentif ythemain goaIs of HD.

These includeidentif yingbaselin edata tounderst andpublic attitu desand beliefs towardwildlife species,identif yin g areasofsup po rtand disagreement overman agem ent options, and under standin g typesofconflictove r manage men t issues.HDresear chcan identif ythekeybeliefsmostrelat ed to attihllies,thushelpin ginthedesign oftar get edspecific edu cation alprogram s.

This dissert ati on focusesonkeybeliefs (e.g.,per ceiveddamage) affecting

attitudes toward brownbearsand wolves.Unde rstanding these attitudescan helpidentif ymessa gesthat will produ cemore effectiveed ucatio na l materi als,as wellas improvingcoll...,en'ationa nd managc ment of thesespecies.

2.2.Hum andimensi on s andgeography

In this subsec tion. the simila rities betw eenHDand geogra phy in thefield of naturalresourcemanagem ent areexplored. It is show n howHD fits within geography, and how geographerscouldexpand theirresearchto incorpo rate certainas pectsof HD.

Historically, decisionsregard ing howtobestmanagenaturalresources wcre centred on informanon comin gfromthebioph ysicalsciences(Brightand Manfredo,1995;Blanchard ,2000). George PerkinsMarsh (186-l)inhis bookMrlll nndNnture add ressedtheneedtodiscuss carcfulma nagementofresour ceswith all inter est groups.An understanding of resour ceman agem entissues, includ ing wildlifemanagernent,in corporatesdiversepcrspectives(f\litche11,1989).Indeed, resourcemanagernent shouldcombine human and bioph ys ical components (DeckerctaI..1996b;Manfr ed o etal.,1996;Bath,1998;Musiani etal.,20(9).

Geogra phe rs hawtheintegr at ed skills need edtoplay a key role in under standin g both physical and humanprocesses (Gau thier, 1991).Resource

gt..~ogra phersha ve explored top icsdealingwith humanimpact,env ironmental

per cepti on,valu es, and public invo lve me ntinanarrayof reso u rcemanage ment

decision -m akin g con dit ions [Saar inen etal.,198-l;Tuan,1990}.lndeed,giv enthe fourtraditions ingeography(i.e.,spatial,areastud ies,man-land,andearth scien ce)(Pattis on .196-1), and thelongtraditi on of studyin gper cept ion stoward naturalhazards such as impacts ofhumans ontheir environm ent (l\larsh,186-1;

Lei ghl y.1963;White,1966;Gior da no,20( 3),extendin gthis concep t to wild life is anatur alprogression.The role ofgeogra p he rs instud y ing HDof wildli fefall s within thehuman- en vir onm entinteraction,formerly known asthe man-land

Therelati onsh ipbetw eensociety and natur e,and thei r com p lexinterpl a y, hasreceiv ed a great deal ofinter estfrom humangeogra p hers lately(Milbo u rne, 2003;Powe r,2008;Pan elli,2()]0).Human geog ra phers have gene ra ted vast amo u n tsof literatureabo u t thehisto ry an dcu ltu ralcons truct io nofhumanan d non-hu man ani ma l relati on s (Lu lka,2000;Emele ta l.,2002;Bu lle r,2008;)ohn son, 2008}.How ever,much of thiswork has focusedon definitions of nature and wilder nessfromthe anthropocentric and anthropomorphic viewpoint(Philo and Welch.1998;Wolch andEme l,1998;Philo an dWilbe rt,2()()0;Vin inget al., 2008}. lv1ostof thearticles ina nimalgeog raphy tend tofocus on dom est ication, thedomin ati on ofhuman s ove r nature an d therole ofzoos in society(Ritvo,1992;

Ingold,199~;An derso n,1995;An de rson,1997;Wolch,2002; Domb ro wski,2( 02).

Mor eov er,theau tho rs undert ak ethese stu d ies to endea vo u r to solveth edualism of thesocial cons tructio nof natur e (Eme letal.,2002).Perhapsmorethan allY

othernatu ral resource,wild lifecha lle nges us tobetterunder standthebridge betweennature an dsocie ty; HD investi gat esthis con nect io n by ask ing the opi n ion,an d understandin gtheatt itu de s,of humanstow ard an ima ls. The differen celays on thefocu s ofthe su bject.While an imalgeogra p hy look s at humansociety in relati ontoanimals,HD looksatind ivid ua l humansinrela tio n to an imals.An ima lgeogra phers' projectsatte m p t tomak enon-hu manani ma ls visible,in light of human resp onsibility ofsha ring the world with non-human animal s(johnston,20(8).HDresea rchproject saimspe ci ficallyat incorp o rating atti tu desof humans in man agem entplansforanimals(Blan ch ard,20(0).

HD andgeogra p hyhav e com mo ncha racte ristics in termsof natu ral resour cemana gementapproa ch es,astheybothinvolvepeoplein thedecision - makingprocess. Atthesametime,these1\\' 0disciplin eshavecom p le me ntary views onthecon nectio n bet w eenhuman s an d the en vi ron me n t,specifica lly with resp ectto an imals.Con necti ng theliterature comingfro mgeogra p hyand HD draws onthe st reng thsof thes esep ar at edisciplin es,an dcreatesamo re co m p rehe ns ivearticu lationofthe subjectofthisdissertati on. Forexam p le, geogra p hyandconservation biologyhave alongtrad ition ofcoliect ingdata at differentscales .Inad d itio n,thesetwodisciplineshavean understandingofthe im po rta nceofident ifyingthe ap p ro p ria tespa tialscaleforgatherin gm ean ingful dat athatfitsin todecisi on-m aki n gprocesses (Opens ha w,19H-t;Wiens an d Bachelet,2010).HDliterature,on theothe r hand,seems tohave anarveap proac h

to scale(Gibsoneta l.,2000):thereis a misma tchbetween thespa tialresolutionof attitudedata collectionand theman agem entscaleforconserva tionissues.

Man agem entdecision s are often political, existin gatalar gerscale(e.g.,natio nal endangered specieslegislation)thanthescaleonwhich impactsmay be felt.HD researchershaveeither chos en tohavedatarepresentative ofa politicalunit, arg u ingthatpolitician sneed an underst andingof theiren tireresource constituency, orof keyinter est groups.

2.3.Humandimensionsin conservation program context Conservationis thepreservati on,prot ection,orrestor ati on0f wild life and its environment.Conservation biology isanapplied, cross-d isciplinaryscience aimedatmaintainingbiod iversity and thenatural processes thatcreateand sustai nit(Groometal.,2006).Parksand protected areashav ebeen the traditionaltoolsusedto achieveconservationofecosy stems.Since park managersm ayh ave adifferentset ofp riorities and idcasth anthe generalpublic abou t howto managewild life(Kellert,2000;Mech,2001),learn ing aboutthe attit udesandopinionsheldbythegener al publicis increasing lyim portan t for effectivewildlifeconservationandprotectedareas management(Bath,1996;

Deckeretal.,20tH;Ericssonet al.,20(4 ). Conservationfailureshavesometi mes resultedfrom focusingon lyon biological andecologica lconsiderationswitho ut takinginto accountsocialfactors(\Vilson,2( 08).111eimportance ofhuman

asp ectsin the conse rva tionofwildlifeis becom ing increas inglyrec ogni zed amo ng wildlifemana ger s,espe'Ciallythosewhodealwith"pro blem wild life"

(Kn igh t,2000;Redpath et al.,2lJO.1).Oneof themost con trove rsial rec entwildlif e issueshas becomethemanagem ent ofla rgecam ivo rcs(Ka rlsso nan dSjl'>strill1l, 2lX17;Bostedt et al.,2008;Majicand Bath,20 Ill).Forexam ple, Bisi et al.(2lXl7) illustratedthe conflictbetweenhowthe citize nsof Finland wouldliketomana ge that country'spopulation of wolves and what Euro pea nUn ionpolicy sta tes.

Resid entswholivecios Losttolarge ca rn ivo rescanbev pote n tia lly, the stron gt."St alli esfortheir conse rva tio northestron gest op po ne n tst(lthat conserva tion (Frillsetal.,2003;Bathand Majit ,2l XXl).Itis vital tounderstandnot onlyresid entiala ttitudesl't'r Sl'buta lsotheirbeha vio urali ntentionsandactual beha viou r(verbalandove rt)(Mitchell.1989;Bath andEnck,2(03).TheHD of wildlife resou rce manage men tis particularly important when managinglarge carnivo res,which oftenarouseconfllcttng emotions among various St.octorsof socicty.Byund erstandin gpublic attitudcs,managersnol ong erhavcto"gu ess"

at public opin ionsormakedecisionsbasedon"gu tf..-elmg s"of howthePublic mayreact.HD res earch,throu gh sta n da rd ize d meth od s. xanprov id edat a based onascienlifica p p roach(Chase elal., 2000).

\\'ithintheprojectfor conservation ofwolv esandbrownbearsinthe rALt\I,researchersatthe Universityof RomeLaSapienza (incollaboration with personn el ofthepark) arestu dy ing bioph ys ical aspec ts through rad io

colla ring and telem etry of wolv es and bear s,gene ticsam pling,and studieson thediets ofseve ral species.\Vhilenecessary,suc h biologicalresearch nlaynot be sufficie nt tounder stand andadd ress thekey issues facin gwolf and brown bear conserva lion in lhea rea(e.g.i1lega l killing).lnad dilio n lobiologicaland ecolog ical principl es,it isnecessar yto consi de r theattitud es andopi nionsof interest groups whendealin g with wildlife (Konig. 2(08).Intheterrito ry of the PAL~ l,wolv esmay be gene ratingcon flictandbearsareentering villagesmo re frequ entl y,possibl yleadin gtolo wertoler an ce of these species bylocalresid en ts.

Bear s and wolv es,killedbypoison,ha ve been foundin theparkarea suggestin g thatthe issue,like many wildlifemana gem entissu es involving largc carn ivo res, tendstobclllor e socio-p olit icalinnatu rethanbi ological(Bath,1 989; Bath and Buchanan ,1 989;Promber gerand Schri;der ,1 992;Musianielal., 2009).Whileitis notknown for certa in if thepoisonbaitsarcspecifica lly intend edfor wolv esand brownbear s,it is knownthat such baitsdoresultin thedeath of the se ani ma ls.

Thusthereisaneedtounderst and whe ther resid entsbeli ev e suchsetti ngof baits can affectbrown bearsandwolves,and wheth ertheyfeelit is im por tant to ad d ress the issueofpoisonbaits.Given thatthehuman com po ne ntofthe wildlife manage me n teq ua tionis soimpo rtantthefocushas beenon understand ingthe pub lic who areaffected,orcanaffect, the wolf and bro wn bea r populationswith whomthey str ive to coexist.

2.4. Human dimen sionsand participationindecision -makin g

Inthe1960s,longafter thedust of World WarII had settle dva socio- culturalshiftoccurred in the UnitedStates.Thetermandconceptsassoci ated with"environmentallyfriendly"wereintheirnascent years.Rachel Carson wrote Sill'lItSl'rillgin l962,w h ichim mediatelybecameabestseller.Herbookmad ethe gene ralpublic realizehow,more often thannotindividu alstendtobekep t in thedarkespecially regardin gthehealthriskstheymayhavebcenexposedtoin

theirdailylives(Blanchard,2000). Garre t Hardin's1968TIII'tragedy oftlIl' COll1l11ollsandPaul Ehrlich's1968ThePopnknio nBOlllh:Popukuioncontrolorrace10 ohlil'ioll?,forcedtheissue ofove rpopulation intothepub lic conscious ness.These booksdem onstr atednotonlyagrowing interestinthc environmentb utalsonn increasedawareness of enviro nmentalisslIesincivilsociety.ln the1960s people started tobeinterestedin the envi ronmcnt,an den vironmentalismwasbecorning an1aSSsocial movem ent(\Vilson,1997;Halvorsen,2006).The follow ingyear, SherryArnsteinwrotethe articleAladder cfCitizenParticipation,whichstilI rem ainsfllndamentaltothed iscussion ofdifferent levelsof publicinvolvement.

She describedaspectr urnofpublicinvolvementfromnon-partie:pationtofull citizenpow er(Arnstein,1969).Ctizenswereincreasinglybecominginvolved withenvironme ntal politi cs.OnAp ril22,1970,thefirst EarthDay was organized, dem onstratingthepublic's sup po rtforprotectingthe earthand focussing atte ntionon threatstothe environment.

Publicinvolv em entin its bas icformhasbeendefinedas anyactio n tak en byan interest edpublictoinfluenceadecision (Prax is,1988).Whi lethe prese nt studydid notpullgro ups togetherinahigh erfor mat of involvem entsuchas jointplanning,the actof inter view ingindividu alsinorde r tounder standtheir attitu de s,valuesand support/opp ositi ontomana gem entop tions,and the addition alstepofprovid ingthat in formation tomanagers,is alowerlevel of publi cinvol vem entknown asinform ati onfeedback.

Themainpre-requ isiteforpublicinvolv ementisthat governmen t, instituti on s,organizatio ns,man agers,and whoev erfindsthernselvesin therole

of"theboss"canexercise fheircapacitvvbut Isfav our abl yinclinedtodelegate

and to sha resomeof theirman agerialpower.Ther eare three other req uire ments that must bemetto ensure successful publicinvolv em ent (Flem ing,1997):time and money: fairness:and inclusion.If met,theycan leadto ahealthy societyand balanceof powerand resourceman agem ent.

Publicinvolvel1lentis basedontwo-\vaycommunication .Pa rticip ant s sh ould trusteachother;differ en cesca n beove rcome whendiscussionis basedon principles and not on stubbornn ess.Positionscanso oftencha ngewhenone discoversmore(Reed,2008)abo u t agivenissue.Com m unica tionisalsoof utmostimport ance,bothinternallywith inspecificgroups ofpart icipant sand externally betweenthegrou ps.Part icipant s sho uld takeinto cons idera tionthat circu ms tancescanva ryover time,and mustbe willingto ada pt tothat.

Publicparticipati on isimportantinconserva tion program s,andgenl' r~l l1y in wildlifemanagement,becauseithelpsredu ce conflictbetweenusersand increase owne rsh ipof thepnX"f.."Ss.lncrcasing own ershipleadsthepublicto bc more sup po rtiveoffina l decisions.Implem entati on ofresoluti ons willbemor e Jurablc andfrL'1!from chaltcng e asm embcrs ofth epubl icar ethemain actors in csta blish ing the dc>cision( Rccd, 2008).lna dd ilion. pa rticipa to ryi n\"oh'cmc nt is very CffL'CtiVCinencourag ingenv ironme nta lly respon sible behavio ur(Dalton, 2005;Wilso n,2008).AldoLeopo ld bd ic\"e<.la nd promo ted lha tconser\"a ti<>ncan be achieve d byhowWClive on theland,by being invol ved,and thr ou gh frc'lu cnt contaclwilhnaturc (Blanchard .2o()();~lill cr andH obbs, 20(2).

HD is both atheoreticaland applieddiscipline,\Vhilethe emphasison pub licparticipa tion is not orig ina l, thefocus onthe application tovvild lifcissu es isnew,Indeed,theprocessof publicparticipationand decisionmakingfo110\\'5 thesamestep sas com m unityplanning:identif yin gwhatpeopl ethink regard ing wildlife; underst and ing why;and incorporatingthose insightsinto pol icy and managementdec ision -m a kingprocesses andprograms(DeckerandChase.1997;

Bryson , 2lJO.t;Innes andBoohe r,2lJO.t;5hee dy,2008;Prell etal.,2009).TIlis dissert ati on focuseson the firs lstepofpublic invo lve rnent bv ide ntifying key bcliefso f the reside ntsof PALt\.ta nd informing the manage rs how the)'ca n use thos einsight stocreat eplan sthatbetter repr esentthe attituJ es ofthos ethat can affl.'Cta ndca nbea ffectcd by largeca rnivo res.

Human Dimensionsresearchfocuseson understandin gtheattitulies, beliefs and behaviour of keyinter est gro u psandloca l resid entstowards wildlife species(Dcckeretal.izunl ).Suchresea rch drawsupon theori es andmethod s from social science disciplines,namelyfrom socialpsychology[Manfredo,1989;

Pattersonet al.,2000).Inthespecializedstudy of attitudes and beh aviour,HD research er susetwo app roaches:one cognitiv eandtheothe r motivational.The form er exa minesconce p ts such as attitudes,norms and vallies;thelatt er see ks to exp lain whywedowhatwedo(Decker etal.,2()(lI ).Canthesebelinked ?To betterunderstandthe attitude -behaviou r relationship,itis importanttobetter

The reare severaldefinitionsofattitu de.Ther e appearsto bewidespr ead agreeme n t (Fishbein andAjzen,1975;EaglyandChaiken,1993;Ajzen,200 1;

Bohner and Wank e,2002; Manfredo,20(8)thattheterm att ituderefersto a gene ral feelin gaboutsom ething.Forexam ple,Schiff (1971:8-9)defin esattitude as"...ano rganizedse tof feelingsa nd beliefs w hich w ill influencean ind ivid llal's behaviour."Fromthisdefinition,onecangeta senseof theattitude-b ehavi our relationship .

Attitudes arcconceptualized into three major components:affective, cognitiveand behavioural(Mitchell,1989).The affectiv e compon entisthef eeling of liking or dislikingsom ethin g.The cognitivecom po ne ntisthebeliefapers on

hasaboutsomething,whichmay orrnaynotbetrue.Forexample, manypeople inPNAL!'"lbelievebrownbears en tervillagesbecausethereis notenoughfood in the surrou ndingabando ned fields,Thethirdcomponen t isthebehav ioural component,orthe statementof how apersonwill behavetowards something;for examp le,showing support fortheplanti ng of appletreesforthebenefitof brown bears (Ostro m,1969; EaglyandCha iken, 1993;Brigh tandManfredo,1996;

Verplankene ta l., 1998).

Topred.ict bchavio ur,it is important toinvesti gateboth theaffective and cognitivecomponents.Asea rlyas 193-l, researcherss uchas LaPiere(193-l) began toquestionwhether therelations hip\\' <ISthisstraightforwa rd..Hedemonst ra ted ina stu dyabout hosting Chinesecouplesinhot elsthattherewerediscrepancies between what peoplesaytheywill do (verba lbehav iour) andwha tpeople actuallydo (overtbehaviour) [Lal't er c193-1as reportedinPettyandCacioppo, 1981).Hen ce,theneedoccurred to separateactualbehaviourfrombehavioural intention .For example, beh aviouralinten tioncouldsim ply be aperson stating thathe/shewilldonatemoneyfor plantingtrees associa tedwiththe conser va tion ofbrow nbea rs-butnotactua lly doingit.Suchconce ptsbecom e formali zedlaterinthetheo ryofreasonedaction(FishbeinandAjzen,1~75)

TheTheory of ReasonedAction(TRA)is<Imodelwheretheimmediate causeofbehaviou r isthebehaviouralintention,whichisdeterminedbythe attitude towardsthebeh aviourand subjectivenorm(Fishbe inandAjzen,1975;

Ajzen and Fishbein,19HO). ln o ther w o rds,i nsteadof asking a pc rson if heor she likeshu n ting,the personcan beaskeddirectl yifhe or shelikes to gohunting.If thatpers onlikeshunting, and hisor hersocialsu rro u nd ingsareacceptingo f hunters,then thatpersonis predict edtogohunting (Fishbeinand Man fred o, 1992).However ,weakpredictions ofspecific behavi ourshavebeenprodu ced from general attitudes.For exam ple,in WeigelandNew man (1976) attitudes towardthe env ironment didnotpred ictparticipationin sev eralspecific environme ntalactivities. Becaus e ofthis, AjzenandFishbein(19HO) notedthat closerrelati ons can be expec tedonlyif bothmeasur es agreein thedegr ee of specificati on(Ajzen and Fishb ein ,19 80; 5heppard eta \.,1988).Whenthequesti on hasbeenmor e speci fic,e.g.as kingwhethe rapersonlikeshuntingblack bear sin NewYork inSeptemberwith friend s,thepredictionof behavi oural outcomes in theTRAhasbeenmor esucces sful(Bohn er andWanke,20(2). TRAhasbeen usedtohelpidenti fy valueorie n ta tions and attitudesinfluen cin gthedeci sionto huntand/or fishinColo rado(Fu ltonet al.,1996).This mod elhas also been implem ent edtounderst and su p po rt foratrappingban (Fu lto ne tal.,1995;Rossi andArms trong, 1999) and to assessattitude s tow ardthereintrodu ction of wolv esinColo ra d o (Pate eta\.,1 996).

The cogn itive hier ar ch y (Fu lto netal.,1996; Vas keand Donn ell)',1999) or value-altitude- behaviourfram ew o rk(Hom erandKah le, 1988; Manfredo,2008) bas ed on the TRA(Fishb ein andAjzen, 1975; Ajzenan dFishbe in, 1980) canbe

usedtounder st andpeopl e-wildlif erelati on sh ips and man agementbylooking at the values,attitudes,norms,and beh aviour of thepublicwith respcctto wildlife conservation.Accord ingto this fram ew ork,each oftheseelelllent sbuildsupon oneano therinwha thasbeendescrib edas aninve rtedpy ra mid.Relat ivelyfew values formthefoundationand numerousbehaviours are found at thetop (Figure2.5) (Fultonetal.,1996;Vask e anti Donn elly1999).

BEHAVIOURS(e.ggohunting) BEHAVIOURAL INTENTION (e.gsupporting hunting)

ATTITUDES,NORM (e.g.likehunting) BASICBELIEFS (e.g.wildl~e use)

VALUE S e.gutilitarian

Many, fasttochange

Figure 2.5.Thecogni tive hier ar ch ymodelofhumanbeh aviou r.Ada pte dfrom Fulto net al. (1996)

Peopl ed evelop wildlifevaillesfrom a yollng ageandthesevaluest endto beresistantto cha nge.Suchvaluesareprecur sors of (and ther efore in flue nce) basicbeliefs,whichare relativelyabstrac tconce pts(Fishbein antiAjzcn,1?75).

antecede ntsof behavi ou ralintention (CarrollandBright,2009;Kretseretal.,

2009).Thus,int ent ionsto engageina specificbeh aviour arethebestpredic to rsof actua l beha vio ur (Ajzen andFishbein,1980;Sorice andConner,2010),

the va rious levelsin thehierarchy(Kaltenb ornandBjerke,2(02) ,Th is dissertationfocuses ontherelation shipbetw eenattitudes,basicbeliefs and

3.Research goal and objectives

In Italy,va riou saspectsof\'\'01£and brown bearbiologyhave been exam ine d in detail,but thehumancomponenthasla rgelybeenneglected . Indeed ,this dissert ati onis thefirstdetailed ,quan titativ eHDstudycarriedout on lar ge carnivo res in the co untry.In Italy, HD as adisciplinestillstrivestobe recogni zed acade micallyand bywildlifemanagem entagencie sas adecis ion- makin gtool. AnoverviewofEu rope an research andadetailedrev iewofall the studies carriedoutinItalyonHDareexami nedin thefirstpaper.Thisisthefirst attem p t topresentthisresear chincon text tound erstandtheprogr essandthe directionofHDas afieldinEuro peandspeci fically in Italy.

This dissert ati onhighlightstheneedfor includingthehuman component in the conserva tionandman agemen toflarge ca rnivo res.Unde rstandi ngpublic attitude stoward wolvesand bro wn bear sisimperativetosuccess ful conservationofthesespecies. The resear chitself,fromtheinterviews perf orm ed tothesharin g oftheresults,isanact of publicinvolvem entin themanagem ent decis ion-ma kingprocessaboutthelar ge carnivores.The res ident smaybecom e awa re and may getinter estedin participatin gin future stepsof the pro ject. The keyfindings from thisfirstHDstudy are focus ed ona specific nati onaI parkin Italy,bu t they also haveim plicationsa t thellat iollaland internatiollallevel for the conser vationoflarge carn ivo res. Mor eover,theinputsderiv edfrom

analyzing theth ree com po ne ntsofattitudes ina uniquestudyhav etheoretical implicati on s suchastheimportan ce oflooking ateachcom po ne ntseparat elyand therelatio ns hi pbetween them.

Man fred o,Teelan d Bright (2()().1)rep ort edthatattitu destud iesare the mos t prev al ent typeofinve sti gat ionin HD of natu ralresources;prob abl y beca usesomecom po ne ntsof attitudes,suchasthe affective andcogn itive ones, areeasily measu redwithclose-e nde d questionnaires. Theycanbesum ma rized withunivariate statistics andoffergood insights intothepercepti on ofthe resp ondent sthat canbeusedbymanager sforbctt erdecision-making(l\lanfredo, 2(08 ).Moreov er,attitudes influencevaluesystems,whichin turnpred ict bcha v ioural in tenlionandu ltima telybehaviour(Fu ltoneta l.,1996;Vaske,2(08).

Therefore,understandingtherelationship between attitudes,beliefsand beh aviou rcanbe one ofthemostimportant uses ofHDconservationprojects.

111isstudypro\'id esbaseJinedataonthe attitudesof the gene ralpub lie,whichis thefirststepfora moreparticipatoryapproachtow ardthe conse rvationof

Desp itethefrequ entuse ofthe atti tu deconce p t todat e.ther e isalack of stud iesexploring thethree componentsofattitudein relationtothe same researchtheme.Furthe rmore, few studiessim ultaneo us lycompareattitudes tow a rdtwodiffer ent spec iesoflarge carnivores,suchaswolv es andbrownbears

(Kellert et al.,1996; Breitenmo ser,199B; Teel et al.,2002;Kleiven et al.,2004;Bath et a l.,2 00B).

Thisdissertati on ad d resses theseweakn essesbyexamin ing thethree attitu de com po ne nts (affectiv e, cogn itive and beh aviour al intenti on ) concu rre ntly focusin g onwolvesand brownbear s,thetwolar ge carnivo res present in Italy.Aquestionn air ethatintegrateditem s ad d ress ingeach com po ne n tofattitud ewas design ed.Inad d ition,ther ewasa sep ar atesection of questi onsforea ch sp ecies,thus all owin g acomp aris on abolltthesehvo spec iesat the same timebythe same particip ant s. Sucha com pa riso n isra rewithin HD resear ch stu die s[Keller tetal.,1996;Breit enm oscr,199B;Teel et al.,2002;Kleiv en eta l.,200-l;Batheta l.,20(8 ). La rge carnivo resare controve rs!alspeciesanda sim ultaneo usexp lora tioncan helpman ager sunder stand whe the r resid en ts perceivethem eq ua lly,wheth erthesepred at or s sho uld bemanagedsepa ra telyo r togeth er,and wheth e rtofocu s ed uca tio na lcampaignson differen t aspectsof eachspecies

To ach ievcthc overar chin g goal ofthisthesis-tounder standthenatur e ofatt itudes andtounderstandthe roleeachcom po nen t hasin conse rva tion issuesforwolvesand brownbear s-eachcom po nentofattitu de becam e a sepa ra te pap er. Startingwith the firstof thethree com po nen tsof a ttitud es,the feelings of the reside nts living with inandaround thePNALrvtnat ion alpark wer einvest igated.The question ofwhe the r resid ent sholddifferent attitudesfor

bears and wolv eswas specificallyexamine d.Seq ue ntially,thesedatawer e connecte dtothe cogn itivecom pone nt by exam ining whetherknowl ed geabout larg e carnivores mod er atestherelati onsh ipbetw eenperceiveddama gebelief (ano thercognitivecom po nen t)and feelin gs (affectivecom po nent)topred ict influencesand pred ict su ppo rt fo rmana gem ent op tions(normative beliefs).The thirdcom po nen tofatt itude s wasinvesti gat edbyunder stand ingwhich reside n ts, andhowmany ofthem,would liketomaint aintheprotection of thesetwolarge carnivorespecies.Unde rstand ingthe relations hipsbetw eenthe affect ive com pone ntofattit udesand the cognitivecom po nen twas alsoimp o rtant (perceiveddama gebeliefs).

The objectivesand null hyp othesestestedin thisresear chwer e:

1)Tounder standwheth erther e are differ en cesbetw eenfeelin gs (affective com po ne ntof attitudes)tow ardwolves and brownbe ar s.

Hol:The re isno significantdifferenceinfeeling s ofthe reside nts towardbrown

2) Tounder standthe streng thof therelati onship sbetween kno w ledge, perceiv eddama gebeliefs [cogn itivecompone nt}andfeelings (affecti ve com po ne nt) topred ictintenti onsto su ppo rtvario us man agem ent0ption s (norm ativ ebeliefs)t oward\\'olves andbears.

Ho2:Therelati on shipbetw een kno w ledge, perceiveddam agebeliefs and feelingsis weak and theydonotpredictnonn at ivebeliefs.

3) To examinethe relati on sh ipsbetween thosewho supportprot ecti on of wolvesand bear s (no rma tive beliefs)with dama gebeliefs (cognitive com pone n t), feelin gs(affective com ponen t) towardlarge carnivo resand gene ral dem ographic/experientialvariabl es.

Ho3: The reis norelat ionshipbetw eennorm ativ e beliefsand the affective- cognitivecom po ne ntofatt itude s.Ther eis norelationsh ipbet weenthos e who wouldliketomaint aintheprotection of wolv es and bears and thefeelings and/or dam agebeliefstow a rdtheselarge carnivo res.

Thesepredict ivestatem ent s aretest ed:I)the affectivecOin ponen~of attitudes(liking/disliking) willva rya mo ng'spccies;I1)thecognitiveco m po ne nt of attitudes (knowledge and per ceiveddamagebelief)is apred icto r of the affective com po nentofattitudes; andIII)thenorm ativebeliefs of attitu des (supp ort/opp ositi onformanagementoption s)is pred ictedbythecogn itive com pone ntof attitude s (per ceiveddam agebeliefsandknowledge) and mod erat edbythe affectivecom po nen t ofatt itudes.

of.Study area

C1.'I'Itr...Af""I'I'in"'''-...nw._lfig...)..u>Ja...~thr~...n...

This protected area lies approximately150krneastofRomeand enco m passes threeregions (Abruzzo,Lazio and Molise), ofwh ich the Abru zzo regionconta insthemajorityof theprotectedterritory.Altho ug hitis predo minantlymountainous,the PNALl\1 is an integrated complexof natural habitats,wilJlife and people,Twenty- five town s andvillages,locatedmainlyat lowaltitudesandalongvalleybotto ms,cover2%oftheterritory (Posillico etal., 20(4).Thesecommun ities maintain strongcultural roots andtraditions.An example isthe yearly procession of aspecificSaintwithineachtownwith traditional costumesand traditionalfood.Thecounty borou gh ofL'Aq u ila (w ith inthe AbruzzoRegion) hasninetownslocatedwithi nthe bound a ries and threetownsinthebuffer zone ofthenationalpark- TIle countybo roughof Frosinonc(withinLazio region)hascight townslocatcd in the bufferzo neofthc nati onalpark.Fina lly,the county boroughoflsern ia(withinMoliseregion)has fivetown slocatedinthebuffer zoneofthenationalpark.TI,ebuffer zone is an areacreatedarou nd theparkboundariesto enhance theprotectionofthe protected areabymitigating mar gin effectandother negativeimpacts ofthe matrix (Battisti,2()().1).Atthesame time, wilhi nthe buffe rzonecertainactivi ties deem ed a susta ina ble useornatur alresour ces,su ch ashunting, collectingfa llen timbe r,harvestingfrui tsor mild developm en t,areallow ed (WellsandBrandon, 1993).

Theflorain thepark is rich and vari ed ,withextens ive areas covered with decidu ou sforests .Thepredominanttree of thepark (56%)isbeech(FllgIIS syll'll/im).At high altitude s(900-1800 m ) itis possibl etofind Down y oak (e.g.

.QlerCllsl'" !>cS(CIS),whileat low er altitu de s the Eu ropea n Turkey oak(Qllerclls cerris)is found(Pos illicoet al.,200~).At high eleva tio nsope n habitats (grasslands ,barerocks) cove r30%ofthe area (Ciu cciandBoitani,200 8).Within theparkther eis anexclusive diver sity of plants(mor ethan 2,000 species exclud ing mosses and lichen s) includ ingende mism suchastrisutarsicn and rare species suc has lady'sslippe r(Cypripedi ulIlcah'CoJus),oneof several orchid sin the park.

Onlyonepavedroad cro sses the entire park,and this runsthrou ghvalley bottom~and mid-elev ationplateau x (1-1%ofthetotalarea).Thes eplateau x are characte rizedbyamixtur e ofagricu ltu ra l lands cap es,settl em ent s,fragm ent ed woodl and s,andpastu res.Thebottomvalleys,onceded icatedtoag ricultural activ ities,aretodaypart iall yre-coloni zedbyforest s,bush es andoccasionally usedfor grazing(L alini et al., 2005).

Livestockbreedin g,while consisting mainly ofsmall flocks ofsheepand goats,iscom mo n in 58%of thepark.From the censusof 1998donebythepark, 27,216 livestock anima ls havebeen estima ted in the area,ofwh ich82%areshee p andgoats.Therearealso several sma ll farmsof horsesandcatt le.Forcentu ries,

f",C'''''''''''ati"n"f]';alure(fUC/';.21ll7). Ar"un,J./11 t" 50imli \'i,Jua b jnhaNt tho.'nalk 'n a1l" rkan,J,ur",und in~a,,·.~(F.ku<Xi ,'IaI.,21l~; Cen·.~i..tal.•21lJlol)

",,/iru,)(figure~_13),ai,,,ind u,J.,Jinth.· IUCN li,t andr-",,-~i,J,·,,-.,jh) 1>0.'

(Latini d aL2005).Ilo.>th

'1""' ... ..

51"";""

.,,'aand ,'n','will ydi,tril>ut,,,l (Lahni,·ta!.. 2lX15)

figu r~4.1.2Ap~nnin~brown""~r

Figure 4.1.3Apennine wolf

4.2.Kingsand bears:the originof thenation alpark

In 1872,the year thefirstnationalparkin theworldwas created (Yellows to ne in the Un itedStates);a royalhuntin greser ve was establish ed in the central part ofthe Apenni nes(Ita ly).In theCamosciara(today theheart of the par k)thisreserv e was crea tedtoprot ect rarespecies.suchas the chamoisof Abruzzo(R/ll'iral'ral'yTt'/lairaomata)andthe Ape nninebrownbear(Urs/ls arctos marsicmws).The bearwas seenasdocil e,shyandworthyof protection (Sieve rt, 1999).

After the First World\\' ar,the co/1IlIlll'of Opi gr an ted theuse ofnearly500 hectares of theterrit or ytotheProMontibusfeder ati on to establisha protected area.Thefirs tnucleusofthenation al parkin the Abruzzoregionwas born.Afte r thesefirst successe softheParkBoa rd,othe rcOlIlllI/ igra n ted pa rto fth eir territoriestothepark. Theparksoongrewto12,000hectares insize.On ScptCl'nber9,1922,lhepark waso fficiallyinaug uratcdatPcscasse roli. In Januar y 1923,the stat e issuedad ecr ee (Royaldecreen.257January 2,1 923,andmade law July12,1923)to establishtheAbruzzo NationalPark withaterritory of 18,OOOht.."Ctares .At that time,thepopul at ionoftheserarespecieswereestima ted

Bycon tras t,wolveswere seenas verminspec ies,dam ag in glive s tock and redu cin gthe popu latio nof cha mois(Sievert,1999).ThePres iden tofthepark, Ermin iosipar i,set upabou nt)'system tok ill wo l\'es(l50 Italia n- lirefora na du lt

male, 50 for apupand250fora nad ultfemale),in thebeliefthatitwouIdhelp thepop ulationof bearsandchamo istorecov er.Inaddition,bountieswere offeredoneagles(50 L)and foxes(25L).Tobettersucceed inthe extermina tion ofthesespecies, Siparisough t thehelpofcitizensfromFra ncewhotrainedforest ran gers tofixpoison baits

In1933thepark lostits workingstatusasaprotectedareaduetothe SecondWorldWar.Althoug h thepa rkwasre-established inthelate19~1Js,the econo mic boomofthatperiodexposed thearea to property spec ulation,paving of roads,and thebu ild ingofvillas,hot els, andski resorts.

In195-i,hunting ofgamespecies withinthepark wasbanned.In1968, ItaliaNostraand ClubAlpino Ita lian o(twoItalianNCOs)together with the WorldWide Fu ndfor Nature(WWF) prep ared thefirst mast erplan forthepark.

Abufferzoneof6lJ,OlJlJ hecta reswascrea tedaroundtheparkin 1971J, andsix yearsla terthepark increaseditsterritoryagain ,to asize of-to,000 hecta res.

In 198-l,the Park Board decidedthatthe"zoning" of theprotected area

developmentofpeople andtheir towns

In1990,thepark expa ndedafourt htime,when anumbcr ofrounnnof Molisedecidedtobecomepartofthepark.In 1999thetow nofValledel Giove ncojoined.andtheparkexpandedonceagain to atotal sizeof50,000 hectares.In the 60,000hectares ofthe outerbuffer areaofthePNALM,year-

h.-lt,-rn-f1'''l lhe rel\i"nanJlhe p'-~'ple ", h" a "" wyn'u<-h p'''t of th,-p,uk

4.3.Zoninl\ofthePark

Th,-..-a ..-f"ur"""",within lr..-!x ' unddries"f lhe na h"na l p",k.whkha'"

.im ilar inthe1'>\'e1 "fpr" l,>cti"n10lh,"'" "f til<.-IL-CNr",t,,,"-d A.. -_IS~ah'I:(";""

Figu re4.3.1ThefourloneSwilhin lhepar koff er diffe,e nth...el.ofprOlec!ion j. dap.edfromwww.pucoa bruzzo.il)

Zonc A. lnteg ra l (meanin gstrict) Reserv erepresent s 6.9%of theterrit ory and isowne dor leasedbythepark.Access is onlyallowe d withapermit,and Ilwinlyfor scienti ficr esear chpurposes.Tourists can onl yaccessthisarea with a guide,arecon fined totrails,and number sarelimited.

Zone B.G ene ra l Reservecovers thcm ajorityof the pro tecte da rea(83.8%).

Th isconsis ts mostly of for est s,in which theparkpermit sthe continua tionof traditi onalactivities,such as collectin g wood ,trufflesand otherfungi.However.

thepark managers speci fy wher eand ho wmuch collecting rnaybedone.

ZoneC.Protecte d Lands cap e em braces8.5%of thepark.Th isis wher e agr o-pa st oral activ itiesare managedin traditi on always.

Zone D.Devel opm ent Zone (0.8%)isthearea of historicaltown s;severa l museums ofendangeredspeciesare locatedin thepark (DiBenede tto,2005;

Synge,2( 04)(Figure4.3.2).

ho.>lw''t'nhuman ho.·inl\sand nature.Mon'than2million 1""1'1,' ,·is;tIh~ I""~I"'"

y,>a r. Wilhin tli,>p,,'~Ih,·..·art· 77hotds,.' il\htca m pinll Meas ,fiveho...t,,,,d

The parkoffers man y outdooractivities,includ ing treks on horseba ckor by mule,bicycle trips,hiking, cross-countryskiing, and wildlifewatch ing (bird watching and bear watch ing duringthesu m me r),Ther e areove r250 kilom etr es oftra ils. Thelocalagency incha rgeof tre kking and na h lralexcurs ionsis ECOTO UR.This agencyalsoorganizesobserva tio nsof bear,deer,and wolf howlin g.Thepark also or ganizcs sp ecialvolunta ryprogr amm es, ecologicaland orien tationcam ps,semina rsand trainingcoursesto encourageahealth y relation shipbetw eenyoung peopleand natur e.

InAbruzzoMarsica there are two skireso rts, onein Pescasserol iand the othe r inScanno.Next tothe ad ministra tivecentreof thepar k area museum and azoofilledwith rescu edanimals nativetothepark.

Almo s teve ry townintheparkhas been provid edwitha Tour Information Cen treandZoneOffice. These cen tresgene rally featur emuseums,botan ical garde nsor"Aree faunis tiche"(fenced territorieswher e animalssuc hasbea rs, wolves or deerlivein semi- cap tive envir onment).

4.S. Stud y zon eso flh eHD resea rch

The studyarea of this HD resea rchincludedthePNALMitselfand its outer bufferzon e,representin g atotalof aboutl,200 km2.The ar ea\vasdi videdinto fourstudy zones:AbruzzoMarsi ca (AM);Abruzzo Fucino(AF);Lazio (LA);and

- ~

' - 0 - ...- - - -

i.:::--

--- - - - -

natu ralresour ces,and specif icallywild life,is im plementedata regionallevel.

Moreover ,bothLazioand MoliscofficiallyjoinedtheParkonlyrecentl yand therefore certa in ben efits ofthepa rk, suchastourismandothe r infrastructure.

arelessdeveloped

Abruzzowasfu rtherdividedintotwostudy zones,AbruzzoMar sico and Abruzzo Fuc ino,toreflectthedistincttopography andhistoryofeach.Abruzzo Fucinoisintheplainarea,where agricu lture,mines andwind fa rm scontr ibute to significant , oftenin tensc, cconomicdevelopment.Ontheotherh and,Abruzzo Marsicaisthehistor icalheart ofthepa rk,andincludesthepark ad minis tra tive cen trein Pescass eroli.InAbruzzoMa rsica,touri smactivitiesaremor edevelo ped, in partbecau sepeopleassociatethiszonewithAbruzzoNationalPa rk(its previousname),butalsoduetothepresen ce ofpo pular ski resort s.Th isstudy zoneisthe only onethatco ntainsvillageswithin the actual territo ryofthepa rk - intherestofthestudy zones,townsexistonlywithinthebuffer a rea.

Thefourstudyzonesinclude atotalof28com m unitiesof the pa rka ndbu ffer zone.Twenty- fiveofthesetownsaredirectlyrelat edtothepark.Twomore, CollelongoandAnve rsanegli Abruzzi,were includedbecause residentswer e divided abo ut wheth ertobepart ofthepark.Finally,thetow nOrtucch io was included becausepois oned bears and wolveshavebeenfound there.

Astheimped imentstoconservationoftencome fromthetownsandtheir residents(e.g.,thosewhousepoisonbaits),mydatacollection hasbeenfocused

at thetownlevel.In this way,the collected data sho uld leadto anun der st and ing of,andability to ad d ress,these conserva tioncha llenges.Finer seale conse rva tio n must occurbecause poisonbaits andpoachi ngoccuratalocal scale.Data colk-ction m ust, the refore,alsobe.l t thissca le.

5.Method

Data werecollected using amixedmeth od ology (Fowler,2002; Ercikan and Roth,2006).Aninitial qualitati veapproachwasusedto identify thekey issues,theirnature,andtheirimportan ce from theperspecti ve0fvariousinterest groups(Hay,2005).InAug us t2006,preliminaryqualitati veinterviewswere com pletedovera one-we ek periodwith sl-lind ivid ualsincludingparkran gers, hunters,shephe rds,biologists,truffle collectors and pa rkmanagers.Fro m this initialresear ch,keyissueswereidentifi ed andaCom monGround Matri x (CGM) produ ced.Th isis amatrixthatvisua lly illustrat esthemainconcernsfromthe per sp ectiveofeachgroup.Theresult allows foranassessmentof the com mon topics acrossvarious interest groups,i.e..the com mo nground(Bath,2000).

Follow ing identi ficati on of thekeyissues,speci fic close-end edquestionswer e desi gnedto obtai n thequantitati vemeasur ementofattitu desand beliefstow ard

Themostrecentnation al cens us(com pleted in20(1)wasusedto determinetheap pro priatestrataand samplesize foreachcom m un itywith in eachstudyzone,thusensuringthatsamplingwas com pletedin proportiontothe ta rgetpopulati on (Sheskin,1985;Hall and Hall,1996;Va ske,2008;Warner,2008) While collectingdatain thefield,alowerrural popul ationwasfoundthan was

expec ted fromthe2001cens us.Thus,ina fewcases,slightlymore or slightlyless peopl ewereintervi ewedper townthanwouldbeind icatedbythe cen sus result s (sec tables 5.I.l,5.1.2,5. 1.3,5 .IA).

Tabl cs 5.I.l,5.1.2 ,5.1.3 and 5.1.4arc based oncens us tracts (ISTAT,200I) for each region (Abruzzo,Lazio and Molise)that wereusedtodetermin ethe numbe r andcharac teristicsof parti cip antsneed edfrom each villagewith ineach study zone .Theresid enc y,ageand sex of individuals wer etak enintoa ccountto ens u re theproportional reprcsc nta tionof thc ta rge l population(She skin,19H5; HallandHall,1996;Vas ke, 200H;lVarner ,200 H).Basedonthe cens uscategor ies, threemajorage grou ps weredefined : younger(from20to 39),middle-a ged (fro m-lOto6-l )andsenior(65 andove r).Fromthe censusda ta,itappeared that thepopul at ion withi neachcom m unity was approximately50%fema leand50%

Based on these criteria,atotalo( 16I1people\\'ereintervi ew ed , consisting of 402resid entsfrom AI\1.400 resid ent sfrom I\fO,4lOresid entsfromLAand399

TableS, 1.15am linframeforAbru zzol\lar s ica Comm u nities Resident s15TAT 2001

Ortona deiMa rsi 726 40 40

Pescasseroli 1711 95 97

Scanno 1766 98 101

Vilielt a Barr ea 482 27 27

Tota l 6723 400 402

Table5.1.2Sa mlinfra me forMoli se

Com munities Resid ent s ISTAT2001 Execte d

CastelSan Vincenzo 577 62 64

Filiuna no 756 82 82

Pizzon e 328 36 36

Rocchettaa Voltu mo 1083 JI7 117

Sea Ii 949 103 101

Tota l 3693 400 400

Table5.1.3Samlinfram efo r Lazio

Co mmunities Res id ent si ST AT 200J Expecte d

Alv ito 2480 96 97

CamoliA len n ino 1394 54 54

Pescos olido 1223 47 47

Picinisco 934 36 37

San Bia uio Saracinisco 300 12 12

San Don atoVal di Comino 1806

Settefrati 684 26 26

Vallero tonda J564 60 54

Tota l 10385 400 410

Table5.1.4Samlinfra mefor AbruzzoFuci no

Communities Resid enl siST AT 200J Exnec te d Inte rv iew ed

Collelonco J270 73 73

Gioia deiMa rs i J880 109 109

Lecc ene i Marsi 1387 82 82

Ortucchio 1558 91 90

Villava llelona 785 45 45

Tota l 6880 400 399

Respo ndentswere selectedusing astratifiedrandom sampling app roach toensurethattherepr esentationofgroups in thesamp lewasproportionaltothe population ofeachstudy zone (Sheskin,1985;Halland Hall,1996;Vaske,2008;

Warn er,2008). Asamp lesizeof.JOOperzoneisstandardandgives resu lts considered accurate19times outof20,plusor minusfivepercentagepoint s (Sheskin,1985).Sucha samplesizeprov id es a 95%confide nceleveland±5%

mar ginoferror, a generallyacceptedstandard insocialscienceresearch (Vaske, 2008).

Onlyresidents wereinterviewed.Mos tparticipants wereselected sim ply bycond uctingtheinterv iewwiththefirstad ultcon tac ted inthehou seh old .In orde rto collect resp onsesfromthereq ui reddem ogr aphics,theinterviewer would,attimes,schedul eintervi ewsto ensu re thatmaleswer eathomeafter work inghours.Other participant swer einter view edusing astreetintercept method(Milleretal.,1997);afew individ ua lswer einterviewed inlocal cafes (typ ically,lessthanfivepeople areina cafe in ruralItaly at onetime).Indeed, adu ltmalesweremor elikelytobe encou nteredatcafesorin themainsq uaresof thetownsthanintheirhouseholds;theseind ivid uals were stillrandoml y selectedusingthe"next topass"rule.

The quantitativ equesti onn a irewasmod elled aftersimila r research instrument sadministeredinother parts ofEuropeincludingFrance (Bath,2000),

Croatia [Majicand Bath ,2010), Spain(Blanco andCo rtes,2002),andPortu gal [Esp irito-Santo.2007).

Thequestionnaire consistedof71 clo se-endeditems(Append ixI). The cIose-ended itemswcr edesignedbytak ingin to cons iderati ond iverselite rature [Krosnick ,1999;Kaczens ky elal.,200~;Flow crdew andMartin,2005).The questionnairewasdesi gned to explo rethevarious componentsofattitudes tow ardwolvesand bro wnbea rs. Athird sectionrega rdi ng compe nsationiss ues forbothspecies wasalsoincluded.

Thequest ionnairewastestedbefor ebein gim plemen ted . After reviewing thewording of somequestions,itwas adm in iste redas apers onalstru ctured interviewattherespon dent'splaceof resid ence,orusingthestreetin te rce pt meth od.Allof theitem s wereclose-e ndedvreduci ngthe cha ncesofinterv ie wer bias.Theprincip alres earcher com pleted mostof thein terview s (11=1,200), occasio nallyaccom pan iedbyanassistant.Atotalof twoassistants weretrain ed an din for me dabo u tthenatureof thestudy,theimportance of being objective, andtheimpor tance of read ingthequestion s exactlyas worded.

A face-to-face in terviewwasiden tifiedasthemostap prop ria te toolto implem entthequantitativequesti onnaire.Theliteratur edemon strat esthat a face-to-facemeth od,despit ethe costassociat edwithcond uc tingin-p er son interview s,tend sto achie ve ahigh er responserat esthan allothermethod s (Holb rook elal.,2003;Linkel al.,2008).lnl laly'sruralar eas,wherethereis stilla