Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26779907›Full record

ArticleAmbio2016

Social factors mediating human-carnivore coexistence: Understanding thematic strands influencing coexistence in Central Romania.

Ine Dorresteijn, Andra Ioana Milcu, Julia Leventon, Jan Hanspach, Joern Fischer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ambio, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ine DorresteijnFaculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany. ine.dorresteijn@gmail.com.
Andra Ioana MilcuFaculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany.
Julia LeventonFaculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany.
Jan HanspachFaculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany.
Joern FischerFaculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Scharnhorststraße 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Facilitating human-carnivore coexistence depends on the biophysical environment but also on social factors. Focusing on Central Romania, we conducted 71 semi-structured interviews to explore human-bear (Ursus arctos) coexistence. Qualitative content and discourse analysis identified three socially mediated thematic strands, which showed different ways in which perceived interactions between people, bears and the environment shape coexistence. The "landscape-bear strand" described perceptions of the way in which the landscape offers resources for the bear, while the "landscape-human strand" related to ways in which humans experience the landscape. The "management strand" related to the way bears was managed. All three strands highlight both threats and opportunities for the peaceful coexistence of people and bears. Management and policy interventions could be improved by systematically considering the possible effects of interventions on each of the three strands shaping coexistence. Future research should explore the relevance of the identified thematic strands in other settings worldwide.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesUrsidaeAnimalsCultureHumansRomaniaSocioeconomic FactorsBrown bearCarnivore conservationConflict mitigationHuman–carnivore conflictHuman–nature relationships

Identifiers

PMID26779907
PMCPMC4824704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.