Stakeholder Acceptance Capacity in Wildlife management
- 1 September 2000
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Human Dimensions of Wildlife
- Vol. 5 (3) , 5-19
- https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200009359184
Abstract
Capacity understanding has been a central driving force in both the biological and human dimensions of wildlife management. The concept of biological carrying capacity has been recognized for a long time. For many years, reference has been made to another form of carrying capacity, that of society to tolerate or accept the impacts of wildlife in particular situations. Attempts to articulate this concept have taken several forms, but all generally recognize the economic or attitudinal limits of society to “carry”; wildlife (e.g., risk perception and acceptance). We compare and contrast elements of the biological and human dimensions concepts of carrying capacity. We then describe the concept “stakeholder acceptance capacity”; in wildlife management and a theoretical model for weighting stakes, including algorithms to illustrate conceptually how stakes can be weighted in management decision making.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- From clients to stakeholders: A philosophical shift for fish and wildlife managementHuman Dimensions of Wildlife, 1996
- Economic Issues in Agricultural Research Priority SettingAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1992
- Concepts of Large Herbivore Population DynamicsPublished by Springer Nature ,1992
- Resolved issues and remaining questions about social carrying capacityLeisure Sciences, 1984
- A conceptual framework for carrying capacity determinationLeisure Sciences, 1984
- Incorporating Farmers' Attitudes into Management of White-Tailed Deer in New YorkThe Journal of Wildlife Management, 1979