Living with wolves: A worldwide systematic review of attitudes

Abstract

This systematic review of peer reviewed articles on attitudes towards gray wolves (Canis lupus), shows that attitudes are mainly measured either by mean values of attitudes or by proportional differences in attitudes. This may impact on how attitudes are perceived and interpreted across studies and areas. However, independent of method used, we found that people living in areas where wolves always have existed, are more negative towards wolves compared to people living in areas where there are no wolves, or where wolves have recovered after years of absence. People who express fear, or being directly affected by having wolves, such as farmers and hunters, report more negative attitudes compared to other groups of respondents. For wolf conservation we recommend politicians and management authorities to prepare local societies of the different consequences of living in wolf areas. We recommend using dialogues and conflict management methods to minimize the level of conflicts.

Keywords: Human dimensions; Interaction modelling; Large carnivores; Tolerance; Wildlife conflict; Wolf.

Fig. 1

Steps in the methodological process to detect and include surveys that met the inclusion criteria

Fig. 2

Number of studies included, by region and country. AFG Afghanistan, ALB Albania, CAN Canada, CHE Switzerland, CHN China, DNK Denmark, DEU Germany, GBR the United Kingdom, GRC Greece, HUN Hungary, HRV Croatia, IND India, IRN Iran, ITA Italy, JPN Japan, LVA Latvia, MEX Mexico, MKD North Macedonia, MNG Mongolia, Multiple study area comprise multiple countries, NLD the Netherlands, NOR Norway, NPL Nepal, PAK Pakistan, POL Poland, PRT Portugal, RUS Russia, SVK Slovakia, SVN Slovenia, SWE Sweden, USA United States of America

Fig. 3

Number of studies per year of data collecting 1975–2019, given for 5-year periods. Colors depict the geographical region in which the surveys were carried out

Fig. 4

Predicted proportions from models with presence status as the predictor variable and attitude towards wolves as the response variable. In the positive proportion model, attitude is given as the proportion of the respondents that were positive towards wolves. In the negative proportion model, attitude is given as the proportion of the respondents that were negative towards wolves. The proportion is given between 0 and 1 for each presence status. On the x-axis, presence status is given, where Persisting = wolves have always been present in study area, Mixed = more than one of the presence statuses applies, Absent = wolves are absent from the study area, Returned = wolves have returned to the study area after being previously extirpated

Fig. 5

Predicted proportions from models with respondent group as the predictor variable and attitude towards wolves as the response variable. In the positive proportion model, attitude is given as the proportion of the respondents that were positive towards wolves. In the negative proportion model, attitude is given as the proportion of the respondents that were negative towards wolves. The proportion is given between 0 and 1 for each respondent group. On the x-axis, respondent groups are given, where Public WA public in wolf area

Fig. 6

Predicted attitude towards wolves from models with respondent group as the predictor variable and attitude towards wolves as the response variable. Attitude is given as a mean score between 1 (most negative) and 5 (most positive). On the x-axis, respondent groups are given, where Public WA public in wolf area