A voice for wild animals: Collaborative governance and human–wildlife conflict

Abstract

Animal lawyers in Australia and around the world often struggle to find room in law to participate in decision-making and give animals a voice. Collaborative governance is a regulatory mechanism that has the potential to overcome this struggle. This ‘new governance’ is of growing importance in environmental and natural resource management, premised on decentralised decision-making and removal of permanent hierarchies. This article will utilise two case studies to outline the benefits of legally integrated collaborative processes for wild animal welfare, including the allocation of a permanent voice in regulation for animal advocates and the ability to promote internalisation of animal-friendly norms.

Collaborative Governance of Narsalis larvatus (Wurmb, 1787) Conservation in Barito Kuala Regency, Indonesia

“…Collaboration drives ecological change and builds social capital, such as public participation and deliberation. It also creates ideas that generate new knowledge and legal decision-making regarding future wildlife and ecosystems (Westerink et al, 2017;Woolaston, 2018;Arantes et al, 2020;Baudoin & Gittins, 2021). In some cases in Europe, partnerships are becoming an effective collaborative effort to achieve sustainable results, such as improving forest management and climate change, and conserving endangered species in the Mediterranean and Atlantic seas (Johansson, 2018;Authier et al, 2017).…”

A Review of the Role of Law and Policy in Human-Wildlife Conflict

“…This article aims to test the hypothesis that law may have significant impacts on HWC, as demonstrated in current human dimensions research, and better understand any links between law, HWC, and human attitudes to conflict, whether it be by way of normative influence or conflict aggravator (i.e., whether the law has a positive or negative association with HWC). Although this connection has been considered by various authors in the discipline of law (see for example Trouwborst 2010;Couzens 2013;Woolaston 2018), there appears to be a real gap in this connection in the conservation science literature. This is tested at first instance by analysing the way that law is considered and discussed by human participants in human dimensions research.…”