Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Socioeconomic characteristics of suitable wolf habitat in Sweden

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Ambio Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Large carnivores are ecologically important, but their behaviour frequently put them in conflict with humans. I suggest that a spatial co-occurrence of suitable habitat and relatively poor socioeconomic conditions in rural areas may contribute to inflated human–carnivore conflict. Here, I test if there is potential for such an explanation for the human–wolf conflict in Sweden, a conflict that is arguably not congruent with the costs and damages imposed by the wolf population. I found negative correlations between wolf habitat suitability within Swedish municipalities and indicators of their relative socioeconomic conditions. I argue that geographic socioeconomic inequality may contribute to the Swedish human-wolf conflict, partly by the use of wolves as symbols for socioeconomic dissent and partly by using them as scapegoats for socioeconomic conditions. Therefore, regional policies aimed at alleviating geographic socioeconomic inequities may create a more favourable environment for solving the human-wolf conflict in Sweden.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allport, G. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Athreya, V., M. Odden, J.D. Linnell, J. Krishnaswamy, and U. Karanth. 2013. Big cats in our backyards: Persistence of large carnivores in a human dominated landscape in India. PLoS ONE 8: e57872.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bautista, C., E. Revilla, J. Naves, J. Albrecht, N. Fernández, A. Olszańska, M. Adamec, T. Berezowska-Cnotaa, et al. 2019. Large carnivore damage in Europe: Analysis of compensation and prevention programs. Biological Conservation 235: 308–3016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini, Y., and Y. Hochberg. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 57: 289–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerke, L., and C. Mellander. 2017. Moving home again? Never! The locational choices of graduates in Sweden. The Annals of Regional Science 59: 707–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostedt, G., and P. Grahn. 2008. Estimating cost functions for the four large carnivores in Sweden. Ecological Economics 68: 517–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostedt, G., and T. Lundgren. 2010. Accounting for cultural heritage - A theoretical and empirical exploration with focus on Swedish reindeer husbandry. Ecological Economics 26: 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, K. 2000. Using the Language of NIMBY: A topic for research, not an activity for researchers. Local Environment 5: 55–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapron, G., P. Kaczensky, J.D.C. Linnell, M. von Arx, D. Huber, H. Andrén, J.V. López-Bao, et al. 2014. Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes. Science 346: 1517–1519.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chively, C. 2007. Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomena: Reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research. Journal of Planning Literature 21: 255–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conceição, P. (ed.). 2019. Human Development Report 2019. Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st century. New York: United Nations Development Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalerum, F., E.Z. Cameron, K.E. Kunkel, and M.J. Somers. 2009. Continental patterns of carnivore guild depletions: Implications for prioritizing global carnivore conservation. Biology Letters 5: 35–38.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dalerum, F., L. Selby, and C.W.W. Pirk. 2020. Relationships between large carnivore population density and live-stock damages in Sweden. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7: 507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dear, M. 1992. Understanding and overcoming the NIMBY syndrome. Journal of the American Planning Association 58: 288–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickman, A. 2010. Complexities of conflict: The importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human–wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation 13: 458–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickman, A.J., and L. Hazzah. 2016. Money, myths and man-eaters: Complexities of human-wildlife conflict. In Problematic wildlife: A cross-disciplinary approach, ed. F.M. Angelici, 339–356. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, L., Poelman, H. and Rodrígues-Pose, A. 2018. The Geography of EU Discontent. European Commission Working Paper 12/2018. Luxenbourg: Office of the European Union.

  • Dressel, S., C. Sandström, and G. Ericsson. 2015. A meta-analysis of studies on attitudes toward bears and wolves across Europe 1976–2012. Conservation Biology 29: 565–574.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duesenberry, J.S. 1949. Income, saving and the theory of consumer behaviour. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, M. 2017. Political alienation, rurality and the symbolic role of Swedish wolf policy. Society & Natural Resources 30: 1374–1388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, T., and F. Dalerum. 2018. Identifying potential areas for an expanding wolf population in Sweden. Biological Conservation 220: 170–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnegan, S., L. Galvez-Bravo, L. Silveira, N.M. Tôrres, A.T. Jácomo, G.B. Alves, and F. Dalerum. 2020. Reserve size, dispersal and population sustainability of wide ranging carnivores: the case of jaguars (Panthera onca) in Emas national park, Brazil. Animal Conservation 1: 11. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J., and M. Sjöström. 2007. Human attitudes towards wolves, a matter of distance. Biological Conservation 137: 610–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, B., J.A. Glikman, and S. Marchini. 2019. Human-Wildlife Interactions: Turning Conflict into Coexistence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gittleman, J.L., S.M. Funk, D.W. Macondald, and R.K. Wayne (eds.). 2001. Carnivore conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson-Forman, K., E. Reimerson, A. Sjölander-Lindqvist, and C. Sandström. 2018. Governing large carnivores—Comparative insights from three different countries. Society & Natural Resources 31: 837–852.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harle, V. 2000. The enemy with a thousand faces: The tradition of the other in western political thought and history. Westport: Greenwood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herch, M.A. 2013. Barriers to ethical behaviour and stability: Stereotyping and scapegoating as pretexts for avoiding responsibility. Annual Reviews in Control 37: 365–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iammarino, S., A. Rodríguez-Pose, and M. Storper. 2018. Regional inequality in Europe: Evidence, theory and policy implications. Journal of Economic Geography 19: 273–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, N., B.P. Smith, R.G. Appleby, L.M. van Eeden, and H.S. Webster. 2020. Addressing inequality and intolerance in human–wildlife coexistence. Conservation Biology Online early. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellert, S.R. 1996. The value of life: Biological diversity and human society. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. 2003. Waiting for wolves in Japan: An anthropological study of people-wildlife relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lê, S., J. Josse, and F. Husson. 2008. FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software 25: 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liberg, O., G. Chapron, P. Wabakken, H.C. Pedersen, N.T. Hobbs, and H. Sand. 2011. Shoot shovel and shut up: Cryptic poaching slows restoration of a large carnivore in Europe. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 279: 910–915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linnell, J.D.C., E.J. Solberg, S. Brainerd, O. Liberg, H. Sand, P. Wabakken, and I. Kojola. 2003. Is the fear of wolves justified? A Fennoscandian perspective. Acta Zoologica Lituanica 13: 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopes-Fernandes, M., F. Soares, A. Frazão-Moreira, and A. Queiroz. 2016. Living with the beast: Wolves and humans through Portuguese literature. Anthrozoos 29: 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald, D.W. 2009. Lessons learnt and plans laid: Seven awkward questions for the future of reintroductions. In Reintroduction of Top-Order Predators, ed. M.W. Hayward and M.J. Somers, 411–449. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, G. 2014. Whose conservation? Science 345: 1558–1560.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Madden, F. 2004. Creating coexistence between humans and wildlife: global perspectives on local efforts to address human–wildlife conflict. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 247–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mech, D.L. 2017. Where can wolves live and how can we live with them? Biological Conservation 210: 310–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moretti, E. 2012. The new geography of jobs. Boston: Houghton Miffling Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naturvårdsverket. 2016. Nationell förvaltningsplan för varg. [National management plan for wolf] Stockholm: Naturvårdsverket. (In Swedish).

  • Pedersen, S., P. Angelstam, M.A.D. Ferguson, P. Wabakken, and T. Storaas. 2019. Impacts of wolves on rural economies from recreational small game hunting. European Journal of Wildlife Research 65: 87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, J., D. Bates, S. DebRoy, D. Sarkar, and R Core Team. 2020. nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1-145, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme.

  • Phillips, S.J., R.P. Anderson, M. Dudík, R.P. Shapire, and M.P. Blair. 2017. Opening the black box: An open-source release of Maxent. Ecography 40: 887–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohja-Mykrä, M. 2016. Felony or act of justice? Illegal killing of large carnivores as defiance of authorities. Journal of Rural Studies 44: 46–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pooley, S., M. Barua, W. Beinart, A. Dickman, G. Holmes, J. Lorimer, A.J. Loveridge, D.W. Macdonald, et al. 2016. An interdisciplinary review of current and future approaches to improving human–predator relations. Conservation Biology 31: 513–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, J.C., K.H. Redford, R.S. Steneck, and J. Berger (eds.). 2005. Large Carnivores and the Conservation of Biodiversity. New York: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Røskaft, E., B. Händel, T. Bjerke, and B.P. Kaltenborn. 2007. Human attitudes towards large carnivores in Norway. Wildlife Biology 13: 172–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandström, C., M. Johansson, and A. Sjölander-Lindqvist. 2015. The management of large carnivores in Sweden - Challenges and opportunities. Wildlife Biology 21: 120–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjölander-Lindqvist, A. 2009. Social-natural landscapes reorganized: Swedish forest edge farmers and wolf recovery. Conservation and Society 7: 130–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skogen, K., and O. Krange. 2020. The Political dimensions of illegal wolf hunting: Anti-elitism, lack of trust in institutions and acceptance of illegal wolf killing among Norwegian hunters. Sociologia Ruralis Online early. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sollund, R. 2015. With or without a license to kill: Human-predator conflicts and theriocide in Norway. In Environmental crime and social conflict: Contemporary and emerging issues, ed. A. Brisman, N. South, and R. White, 95–124. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Sweden. 2020. Statistics Sweden Provides Society with Useful and Trusted Statistics. Retrieved 4 August 2020 from https://www.scb.se/en/.

  • Stegmann McCallion, M. 2016. Regionalism in Sweden. Strasbourg: Assembly of European Regions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treves, A., and J. Bruskotter. 2014. Tolerance for predatory wildlife. Science 344: 476–477.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Treves, A., and K.U. Karanth. 2003. Human–carnivore conflict and perspectives on carnivore management worldwide. Conservation Biology 17: 1491–1499.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eeden, L.M., M.S. Crowther, C.R. Dickman, D.W. Macdonald, W.J. Ripple, E.G. Ritchie, and T.M. Newsome. 2017. Managing conflict between large carnivores and livestock. Conservation Biology 32: 26–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Essen, E., and M.P. Allen. 2017. Reconsidering illegal hunting as a crime of dissent: Implication for justice and deliberative uptake. Criminal Law and Philosophy 11: 213–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Essen, E., and M.P. Allen. 2000. ‘Not the Wolf Itself’: Distinguishing hunters’ criticisms of wolves from procedures for making wolf management decisions. Ethics, Policy & Environment 23: 97–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Essen, E., and M. Allen. 2020. ‘Not the wolf itself: Distinguishing hunters’ criticisms of wolves from procedures for making wolf management decisions. Ethics, Policy & Environment 23: 97-113.

  • Warton, D.I., and F.K.C. Hui. 2011. The arcsine is asinine: The analysis of proportions in ecology. Ecology 92: 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Maria Miranda, associate editor Wynand Boonstra and two anonymous reviewers provided valuable comments on drafts of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Unit of Biodiversity (UO-CSIC-PA), Mieres Campus, University of Oviedo, 33600, Mieres, Asturias, Spain

    Fredrik Dalerum

  2. Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

    Fredrik Dalerum

  3. Mammal Research Institute, Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Fredrik Dalerum

Authors
  1. Fredrik Dalerum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fredrik Dalerum.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 85 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dalerum, F. Socioeconomic characteristics of suitable wolf habitat in Sweden. Ambio 50, 1259–1268 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01524-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01524-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation