Abstract

Swedish hunters sometimes appeal to an inviolate 'right to exist' for wolves, apparently rejecting NIMBY. Nevertheless, the conditions existence hunters impose on wolves in practice fundamentally contradict their use of right to exist language. Hunters appeal to this language hoping to gain uptake in a conservation and management discourse demanding appropriately objective ecological language. However, their contradictory use of 'right to exist' opens them up to the charge that they are being deceptive - indeed, right to exist is a 'disguised NIMBY!' We address this situation by distinguishing hunters' criticisms of wolves from the procedures for reaching objective policy decisions.

Keywords

Wolves; conservation policy; deliberation; NIMBY; meta-consensus; hunters

Published in

Ethics, Policy and Environment
2020, Volume: 23, number: 1, pages: 97-113
Publisher: ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD

SLU Authors

• von Essen, Erica

  • Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Fish and Wildlife Management


Publication identifier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2020.1746009

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/123118