Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management
Course evaluation
The course evaluation is now closed
BI1300-30273 - Course evaluation report
Once the evaluation is closed, the course coordinator and student representative have 1 month to draft their comments. The comments will be published in the evaluation report.
Additional course evaluations for BI1300
Academic year 2022/2023
Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management (BI1300-30189)
2023-01-16 - 2023-03-21
Academic year 2021/2022
Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management (BI1300-30097)
2022-01-17 - 2022-03-23
Academic year 2020/2021
Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management (BI1300-30030)
2021-01-18 - 2021-03-23
Academic year 2019/2020
Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management (BI1300-30045)
2020-01-20 - 2020-03-24
Academic year 2018/2019
Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management (BI1300-30075)
2019-01-21 - 2019-03-25
Syllabus and other information
Syllabus
BI1300 Human Dimensions of Fish and Wildlife Management, 15.0 Credits
Samhällsaspekter av vilt- och fiskförvaltningSubjects
Forest Science BiologyEducation cycle
Master’s levelModules
| Title | Credits | Code |
|---|---|---|
| Single module | 15.0 | 0101 |
Advanced study in the main field
Second cycle, has only first-cycle course/s as entry requirementsMaster’s level (A1N)
Grading scale
The grade requirements within the course grading system are set out in specific criteria. These criteria must be available by the course start at the latest.
Language
EnglishPrior knowledge
Knowledge equivalent to 120 credits at the basic level including- 60 credits Biology or
- 60 credits Natural Resource Management or
- 60 credits Forest Science or
- 60 credits Environmental Sciences or
- 60 credits in Political Science, or
- 60 credits Sociology, or
- 60 credits Human Geography
and
- English 6.
Objectives
The aim of the course is for students to be familiar with the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary foundation of the human dimensions field, as well as with the human aspects that characterize current issues in the sustainable governance and management of natural resources.
After completion of the course the student should be able to:
Describe the human aspects involved in natural resource management.
Include human aspects in the management of wildlife, fish, and other natural resources.
Identify the basic patterns of conflict and be able to apply principles of conflict management.
Critically examine qualitative and quantitative data regarding how humans value natural resources.
Account for and discuss environmental communication.
Determine when a specialist in the human dimensions of natural resources should be contacted.
Content
This course focuses on the sustainable management of natural resources, especially fish and wildlife resources, from a contemporary human dimensions’ perspective. Participants will gain a deeper knowledge of the governance and management of fish and wildlife, why and how people value fish and wildlife, become familiar with community-related impacts on natural resources, economic considerations, conflict management, environmental communication and be able to evaluate quantitative and qualitative methods used in human dimensions research.
To fulfill the learning objectives, the course will include lectures, seminars, exercises, role plays, group assignments, study visits and literature studies, of which some will be compulsory. The student will carry out an individual project, write a report and orally present in a seminar.
Grading form
The grade requirements within the course grading system are set out in specific criteria. These criteria must be available by the course start at the latest.Formats and requirements for examination
Approved written exams and approved participation in cumpulsory activities.
If a student has failed an examination, the examiner has the right to issue supplementary assignments. This applies if it is possible and there are grounds to do so.
The examiner can provide an adapted assessment to students entitled to study support for students with disabilities following a decision by the university. Examiners may also issue an adapted examination or provide an alternative way for the students to take the exam.
If this syllabus is withdrawn, SLU may introduce transitional provisions for examining students admitted based on this syllabus and who have not yet passed the course.
For the assessment of an independent project (degree project), the examiner may also allow a student to add supplemental information after the deadline for submission. Read more in the Education Planning and Administration Handbook.
Other information
The right to participate in teaching and/or supervision only applies for the course instance the student was admitted to and registered on.
If there are special reasons, students are entitled to participate in components with compulsory attendance when the course is given again. Read more in the Education Planning and Administration Handbook.
Additional information
The course is a part of the Master’s Programme - Management of Fish and Wildlife Populations but is open to other students.SLU is environmentally certified according to ISO 14001. A large part of our courses cover knowledge and skills that contribute positively to the environment. To further strengthen this, we have specific environmental goals for the education. Students are welcome to suggest actions regarding the course’s content and implementation that lead to improvements for the environment. For more information, see webpage www.slu.se.
Responsible department
Department of Forest Economics
Cooperating departments:
Further information
Litterature list
Recommended readings
**Note: **This list is a collection of readings that are recommended. Not of them are mandatory. Students may or may not find the material listed here as relevant to their specific research topic, and therefore they are encouraged to search relevant material by themselves. The list is not presented in a specific order –students are encouraged to browse the list and chose their path into reading it.
Books:
Human Dimensions of Wildlife Management, 2nd edition (Decker, D. J., S. J. Riley, and W. F. Siemer, 2012)
Navigating Environmental Attitudes (Heberlein, T. A., 2012)
Articles
Johansson, M., Dressel, S., Kvastegård, E., Ericsson, G., Fischer, A., Kaltenborn, B., Vaske, J. & Sandström, C. (2016). Describing Human-Wildlife Interaction from a European Perspective. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 21(2), 158-168.
Bennett, N.J.; Roth, R.; Klain, S.C.; Chan, K.; Christie, P.; Clark, D.A.; Cullman, G.; Curran, D.; Durbin, T.J.; Epstein, G., et al. (2017). Conservation social science: Understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation. Biological Conservation, 205, 93-108.
Ostrom E (2009) A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science 325(5939):419-422
The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2019 (scan page 4-21). Available in Canvas, or HERE
Hunt, L. M., et al. (2013). "Illustrating the critical role of human dimensions research for understanding and managing recreational fisheries within a social-ecological system framework." Fisheries Management and Ecology 20(2-3): 111-124.
Dressel, S.; Ericsson, G.; Sandström, C. (2018). Mapping social-ecological systems to understand the challenges underlying wildlife management. Environmental Science & Policy, 84, 105-112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.03.007.
Decker, D., Smith, C., Forstchen, A., Hare, D., Pomeranz, E., Doyle‐Capitman, C., ... & Organ, J. (2016). Governance principles for wildlife conservation in the 21st century. Conservation Letters, 9(4), 290-295.
Lockwood, M.; Davidson, J.; Curtis, A.; Stratford, E.; Griffith, R. (2010). Governance Principles for Natural Resource Management. Soc. Nat. Resour., 23, 986-1001, doi:10.1080/08941920802178214.
Rist L, Felton A, Samuelsson L, Sandström C, & Rosvall O (2013) A new paradigm for adaptive management. Ecology & society 18(4):63-.
Hasselman, L. (2017). Adaptive management intentions with a reality of evaluation: Getting science back into policy. Environmental Science & Policy 2017, 78, 9-17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.08.018.
Dressel, S.; Ericsson, G.; Johansson, M.; Kalén, C.; Pfeffer, S.E.; Sandström, C. (2020). Evaluating the outcomes of collaborative wildlife governance: The role of social-ecological system context and collaboration dynamics. Land Use Policy, 99, 105028, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105028.
Madsen, J., Williams, J. H., Johnson, F. A., Tombre, I. M., Dereliev, S., & Kuijken, E. (2017). Implementation of the first adaptive management plan for a European migratory waterbird population: The case of the Svalbard pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus. Ambio, 46(2), 275-289. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280-016-0888-0
Hasselman, L. (2017). Adaptive management; adaptive co-management; adaptive governance: what’s the difference? Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 24, 31-46, doi:10.1080/14486563.2016.1251857.
Teel, T.L.; Manfredo, M.J. (2010). Understanding the Diversity of Public Interests in Wildlife Conservation. Conservation Biology, 24, 128-139, doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01374.x.
Kinzig, A.P.; Ehrlich, P.R.; Alston, L.J.; Arrow, K.; Barrett, S.; Buchman, T.G.; Daily, G.C.; Levin, B.; Levin, S.; Oppenheimer, M., et al. (2013). Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges: The Complex Interaction of Behaviors, Values, and Policy. BioScience, 63, 164-175, doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.3.5.
Teel, T.L.; Manfredo, M.J.; Jensen, F.S.; Buijs, A.E.; Fischer, A.; Riepe, C.; Arlinghaus, R.; Jacobs, M.H. Understanding the Cognitive Basis for Human-Wildlife Relationships as a Key to Successful Protected-Area Management. International Journal of Sociology 2010, 40, 104-123, doi:10.2753/IJS0020-7659400306.
Online: http://teebweb.org/
Brauman,K., Daily G. 2014. Ecosystem Services. Encyclopedia of Ecology. 1148-1154.
National Research Council. 2005. Chapter 2: The Meaning of Value and Use of Economic Valuation in the Environmental Policy Decision-Making Process Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making. The National Academies Press. 33-58
Brauman et al. 2007. The Nature and Value of Ecosystem Services: An Overview Highlighting Hydrologic Services. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2007. 32:67–98
Liekens et al. 2013. Chapter 2: Ecosystem Services and Their Monetary Value. In: Ecosystem Services.
Sorg, C. Loomis, J. 1985. An Introduction to Wildlife Valuation Techniques. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 13(1): 38-46.
National Research Council. 2005. Chapter 4: Methods of Non-market Valuation. Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making. The National Academies Press. 95-152
The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. 2018. Guide to valuing ecosystem services
Guerra, A. S., Madigan, D. J., Love, M. S., & McCauley, D. J. 2018. The worth of giants: The consumptive and non‐consumptive use value of the giant sea bass (Stereolepis gigas). Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 28(2), 296-304.
Martínez-Cruz, A. L., Juárez-Torres, M., & Guerrero, S. 2017. Assessing impacts from climate change on local social-ecological systems in contexts where information is lacking: An Expert Elicitation in the Bolivian Altiplano. Ecological Economics, 137, 70-82.
Johnston, R. J., Boyle, K. J., Adamowicz, W., Bennett, J., Brouwer, R., Cameron, T. A., ... & Tourangeau, R. (2017). Contemporary guidance for stated preference studies. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 4(2), 319-405.
Navrud, S., & Strand, J. (2018). Valuing global ecosystem services: What do European experts say? Applying the delphi method to contingent valuation of the amazon rainforest. Environmental and Resource Economics, 70(1), 249-269.
Myers, et al. 2013. The relationship between personal experience and belief in the reality of global warming. Nature Climate Change, 3, 343-347.
Herrnstadt, E., Muehlegger, E. 2014. Weather, salience of climate change and congressional voting. 2014. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 68, 435-448.
Goebel et al. 2015. How natural disasters can affect environmental concerns, risk aversion, and even politics: evidence from Fukushima and three European countries. Journal of Population Economics, 28, 1137-1180.
Liekens and Leo De Nocker. 2013. Valuation of ES: Challenges and Policy Use. In: Ecosystem Services.
CMP Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation v4.0 (2020) https://conservationstandards.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/10/CMP-Open-Standards-for-the-Practice-of-Conservation-v4.0.pdf
Redpath SM, et al. (2013). Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28(2):100-109.
Madden, F.; McQuinn, B. Conservation’s blind spot: The case for conflict transformation in wildlife conservation. Biological Conservation 2014, 178, 97-106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.07.015.