Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology Program, Department of Forestry & Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, USA.
Division of Environmental Communication, Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Ambio. 2019 Mar;48(3):230-239. doi: 10.1007/s13280-018-1072-5. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
Self-policing is essential for addressing wildlife-related crime where illegal activity is extremely diffuse, and limited resources are available for monitoring and enforcement. Emerging research on self-policing suggest key drivers including economics, folk traditions, and socio-political resistance. We build on this research with a case study evaluating potential drivers of self-policing illegal wolf killing among Swedish hunting teams. Swedish hunters marginally leaned toward considering illegal hunting of wolves an expression of resistance (10.30 out of a possible 17 on a resistance scale) and strongly believed outsiders had undue influence over hunting (15.79 out of a possible 21 on an influence scale). Most (73%) Swedish hunters stated they would report illegal wolf killing to authorities, but 20% stated they would handle the infractions through internal sanctions. Viewing illegal hunting of wolves as a form of political resistance, viewing wolf management as being controlled locally, and perceived prevalence of illegal wolf killing among hunting acquaintances were positive predictors of preferring internal sanctions to address illegal wolf killing over reporting the crimes. Resistance and perceived prevalence of wolf killing also predicted preferring no action to address illegal wolf killing. These results suggest that a counterpublic of marginalized ruralism may promote forms of self-policing that rely on internal censure for illegal wolf killing rather than using formal legal channels. Similarly, folk traditions within this counterpublic (e.g., perceptions of prevalence of illegal wolf killing) shape if and how internal sanctions are advocated. Re-engaging marginalized hunting groups and emphasizing the rarity of illegal wolf killing may promote wolf conservation, both in Sweden and in other democratic regimes.
自我监管对于解决与野生动物相关的犯罪至关重要，因为非法活动极其分散，而且监测和执法的资源有限。新兴的自我监管研究表明，关键驱动因素包括经济、民间传统和社会政治抵制。我们以一项评估瑞典狩猎队非法杀狼自我监管潜在驱动因素的案例研究为基础。瑞典猎人略微倾向于将非法猎杀狼视为一种抵制行为（在抵制尺度上为 17 分中的 10.30 分），并且强烈认为外部人士对狩猎有不当影响（在影响尺度上为 21 分中的 15.79 分）。大多数（73%）瑞典猎人表示他们会向当局报告非法杀狼行为，但有 20%的人表示他们将通过内部制裁来处理违规行为。将非法猎杀狼视为一种政治抵制形式、将狼管理视为本地控制、以及认为狩猎熟人中普遍存在非法杀狼行为，是更倾向于通过内部制裁来解决非法杀狼问题而不是报告犯罪的积极预测因素。抵制和普遍存在的杀狼行为也预示着更倾向于不采取行动来解决非法杀狼问题。这些结果表明，边缘化的农村主义的反公共领域可能会促进依赖内部谴责的自我监管形式，而不是使用正式的法律渠道来解决非法杀狼问题。同样，这个反公共领域中的民间传统（例如，对非法杀狼普遍存在的看法）决定了内部制裁是否以及如何得到倡导。重新吸引边缘化的狩猎群体，并强调非法杀狼的罕见性，可能会促进狼的保护，无论是在瑞典还是在其他民主国家。
