<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <rss version="2.0">
      <channel xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
        <title>Frontiers in Conservation Science | Conservation Social Sciences section | New and Recent Articles</title>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/conservation-science/sections/conservation-social-sciences</link>
        <description>RSS Feed for Conservation Social Sciences section in the Frontiers in Conservation Science journal | New and Recent Articles</description>
        <language>en-us</language>
        <generator>Frontiers Feed Generator,version:1</generator>
        <pubDate>2026-05-13T07:41:31.835+00:00</pubDate>
        <ttl>60</ttl>
        <item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2026.1699294</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2026.1699294</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Human–giraffe conflict in eastern Kenya: local interactions, attitudes, perceived risks, and pathways to coexistence]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-02-24T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Abdullahi H. Ali</author><author>Edwin L. Sangale</author><author>Mohamed H. Ali</author><author>Adam T. Ford</author><author>Carly C. Sponarski</author>
        <description><![CDATA[IntroductionGiraffe populations across Africa face increasing pressures from habitat loss, poaching, and climate-driven resource scarcity, often intensifying interactions with nearby communities. In eastern Kenya, these pressures have contributed to emerging human–giraffe conflict (HGC), including crop losses, competition for water, and occasional livestock injuries. Although this reticulated giraffes play an important ecosystem role in the African savanna and the socio-economic well-being of African communities, their interactions with people, and how communities perceive and navigate HGC especially in non-tourism regions remains understudied.MethodsTo address this gap, we conducted 400 structured interviews with households around Bour-Algy Giraffe Sanctuary to assess local interactions with giraffes, attitudes, perceived risks, conflict drivers and preferred strategies for coexistence.ResultsOn average, respondents generally possessed positive attitudes towards giraffes and, on average, respondents did not see giraffes as a risk: to personal or children’s safety, of disease transfer, to cattle productivity, or the integrity of the land. Risk perception even decreased if a respondent had encountered a giraffe. Interestingly, giraffes were perceived not to cause damage to land or other property by 59% of participants thus highlighting that it may be possible to promote co-existence in the region for a majority of people. Competition for water, lack of awareness on giraffe ecology, giraffe habitat encroachment, and poverty were raised as the four main cause of conflict. Respondents supported the use of fire, torches, and dogs as way to deter giraffes from farms.DiscussionOur findings reveal a landscape where conflict exists but remains manageable, and where strong community support for giraffe presence provides a foundation for conflict transformation. Because of the proximity of giraffes to farms and homesteads, economic activities such as agriculture and cultural tourism, women-led acacia tree nurseries, invasive prosopis control and utilization along with opening up water corridors may motivate communities and minimize HGC. Our work provides a basis for action by the community and policy makers to promote giraffe-farmer co-existence in eastern Kenya.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1634211</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1634211</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Barriers and facilitators of behavior change for the sustainable harvesting of Sphagnum magellanicum moss in southern Chile]]></title>
        <pubdate>2026-01-28T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Eduardo Leiva-Pinto</author><author>Cecilia Alarcón</author><author>Viviana Tartakowsky</author><author>Manuela Zúñiga</author><author>Alfonso Benítez-Mora</author><author>Jaime Herrera</author><author>Carolina A. León</author>
        <description><![CDATA[This article addresses the critical global challenge of promoting sustainable practices for the use of renewable natural resources. In this research this is studied by analyzing the barriers and facilitators of behavior change in the sustainable harvesting of Sphagnum magellanicum moss in the Los Lagos Region of Chile. This study fills a significant knowledge gap by exploring how to design and implement interventions that enhance individual and collective capability to manage resources. Employing a qualitative methodology, the research draws on two complementary theoretical frameworks: Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model and Michie’s Behavior Change Wheel (COM-B system). The findings reveal emergent categories within the COM-B framework, highlighting specific barriers and facilitators to the adoption of pro-environmental behaviors. Furthermore, the study demonstrates the intricate interplay between these factors and the hierarchical systems of Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model. This research provides practical information for policy makers and practitioners seeking to foster sustainable behaviors, contributing to global efforts in environmental conservation, and sustainable resource management.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1704218</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1704218</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Evolution of fisheries, aquaculture, and crocodile farming governance in Zimbabwe within the Southern African policy context]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-12-12T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Systematic Review</category>
        <author>Beaven Utete</author><author>Nyasha Mabika</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Capture fisheries, crocodile ranching, and aquaculture provide vital food resources for enhanced food security and nutrition and sustain livelihoods in Southern Africa. Conflicting policies, regulations, and institutional overlaps affect the operation and management of capture fisheries, crocodile ranching, and aquaculture, threatening their sustainability. This scoping review examined the evolution of fisheries, aquaculture, and crocodile farming governance from 1890 to 2021 in Zimbabwe within the Southern African policy context. This aims (i) to identify the legal and policy frameworks for capture fisheries, crocodile farming, and aquaculture firms in Southern Africa and Zimbabwe; (ii) to explore the evolution and gaps in the legislation and policies for capture fisheries, crocodile farming, and aquaculture firms in Southern Africa and Zimbabwe; and (iii) to highlight the strengths and future dimensions for developing prudent management policies for fisheries, crocodile ranching, and aquaculture. Five concatenated evolutionary phases, that is, the soft conservation period (1866–1890), the establishment period (1891–1938), the consolidation of fisheries and crocodile conservation period (1938–1961), the quintessential conservation period (1962–1978), and the conservation progression period (1980–2021)—punctuated by persistent neglect of aquaculture and crocodile ranching, institutional overlaps, and the prominent influence of affluent recreational angling societies on fisheries policy development were identified for Zimbabwe. Within Southern Africa, the evolution of fisheries and aquaculture policies has been more rapid for countries with coastal (marine) and inland freshwater resources such as Namibia, Cape Verde, the Comoros Islands, Seychelles, Madagascar, Mauritius, South Africa, and Tanzania. Armed conflicts slowed (or are slowing) down the evolutionary pace of fisheries and aquaculture policies in Angola, Mozambique, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Aquaculture is still a fledgling industry; thus, development of the relevant consolidated aquaculture and fisheries governing policies is still in its infancy across Southern Africa. This necessitates standalone, harmonized aquaculture and fisheries policies. Zimbabwe, like all Southern African Development Community (SADC) member states, needs to align its fisheries and aquaculture policies with the SADC Fisheries Sector Policy as guided by the Policy Framework and Reform Strategy for Fisheries and Aquaculture in Africa in order to diversify and enhance sustainable fishing dependent livelihoods.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1701972</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1701972</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Beyond success stories: learning from behavioral interventions in zoo conservation fundraising]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-12-10T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Joao Neves</author><author>Kristina Leong</author><author>Inês Correia</author>
        <description><![CDATA[BackgroundEfforts to stem the species extinction crisis have been hampered by lack of funding. While public investment is key, private donations play an important role in wildlife conservation.ObjectiveThis study investigated whether persuasion techniques in bird show scripts could increase pro-conservation behavior at Zoomarine Algarve.MethodsAn initial exploratory study compared control and modified tropical bird show scripts using three persuasion strategies (“identifiable victim”, “anchoring effect”, and “bandwagon effect”), measured by conservation bracelet sales. The main study then focused on the “identifiable victim” effect, involving 116 sampling days in two conditions during summer 2023, with 148,545 visitors.ResultsThe exploratory study showed the modified script unexpectedly decreased sales. The main study found no significant difference in bracelet sales between conditions (Z = -.60, p = .55).ConclusionsThis research suggests complexities of applying persuasion techniques in field experiments and underscores the need for proper evaluation for informed decisions. The study provides insights into communication barriers and factors influencing conservation engagement in zoos, underlining the importance of communicating null results for advancing scientific understanding.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1659491</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1659491</link>
        <title><![CDATA[From classrooms to conservation: scaling environmental education across India’s Western Ghats]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-12-04T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Krithi K. Karanth</author><author>Sruthi Unnikrishnan</author><author>Gabby Salazar</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Biodiversity hotspots are areas of exceptional ecological value and they often coincide with high human population densities. These biodiverse areas may experience high levels of human-wildlife conflict, threatening both wildlife and local communities. While environmental education (EE) offers a promising tool for mitigating conflict, the ecological, cultural, and political diversity across hotspots poses significant challenges for designing and adapting effective EE interventions. To test whether an EE program could scale across the Western Ghats, a biodiversity hotspot in India, we developed and implemented the Wild Shaale program in government schools across three states: Goa, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu from June 2022 to February 2023. Our objective was to assess whether the program had a consistent impact across states or if regional differences influenced learning outcomes. Here, we report on data from 7381 students from 200 schools around 11 wildlife reserves with equal participation from boys and girls across the three states. We found that participation in the Wild Shaale program led to significant increases in environmental knowledge and knowledge of safety behaviors in all three states, as well as small positive shifts in most measures of environmental attitudes. We also found that there are significant differences in baseline attitudes towards wildlife and baseline levels of environmental knowledge across states. Students in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu had a more positive baseline attitude towards wildlife in general compared to Goa and students in Tamil Nadu had the lowest pre-test scores on environmental knowledge questions. Despite small regional differences, we found that Wild Shaale emerges as a scalable education program that is effective across diverse cultural, political and ecological contexts. We show that a single, adaptable EE program can be effectively scaled across diverse socio-ecological contexts.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1693314</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1693314</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Disentangling public perceptions to pave the way for pollinator-friendly roadsides]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-11-26T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Laura A. Warner</author><author>Cody Gusto</author><author>Sravani Pasula</author><author>Jaret Daniels</author><author>Anissa Mattox</author><author>Sydney Honeycutt</author><author>Ricky Telg</author><author>Angie Lindsey</author>
        <description><![CDATA[IntroductionRapid urbanization and land use changes have resulted in extensive road coverage, making roadsides increasingly important as critical landscapes that can support biodiversity. Pollinator-friendly roadsides offer ecological benefits, but public support is essential for their successful implementation. Despite this, adequate audience analyses to inform impactful public initiatives benefiting pollinators have not been conducted. This research study aimed to document public knowledge, perceptions, concerns, and information-seeking preferences regarding pollinator-friendly roadsides to guide future communication campaigns.MethodsWe conducted an initial, descriptive audience analysis using quota sampling to survey 1,011 Floridians. The survey measured four key areas: (1) knowledge, (2) perceptions, (3) concerns, and (4) preferred communication channels related to pollinator-friendly roadsides. Descriptive statistics were used to quantify the findings.ResultsRespondents demonstrated relatively high perceived and actual knowledge of pollinator-friendly roadsides. Perceptions varied, with both positive and negative views of pollinator-friendly roadsides expressed. Ecological and environmental benefits were ranked as the most important characteristics, while safety concerns and increased expenses emerged as the most significant barriers. Preferred communication strategies included immersive experiences such as demonstration gardens at rest stops and road signage. Social media, particularly YouTube, was identified as the favored digital platform for learning about pollinator-friendly roadsides.DiscussionFindings suggest that educational communications should emphasize ecological benefits while addressing safety and cost concerns and correcting misperceptions. Immersive roadside experiences combined with digital content can enhance public engagement. Future research should include message testing and apply behavioral theory to identify strategies for increasing public support for pollinator-friendly roadsides. Significant opportunities remain to conduct message testing and behavioral theory-based research to uncover ways to increase public support for pollinator-friendly roadsides.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1648815</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1648815</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Cowboying for coexistence? Range riding in the New West]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-10-13T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Ada P. Smith</author><author>Jeff Vance Martin</author><author>Taylor Kwait</author><author>Robert M. Anderson</author><author>Kathleen Epstein</author><author>Susan Charnley</author><author>Hannah Gosnell</author>
        <description><![CDATA[As wolf and grizzly bear populations recover across the American West, livestock producers face renewed challenges of coexistence, prompting increased interest in nonlethal conflict mitigation strategies. One such tool – range riding – uses human presence to prevent depredation and monitor livestock. While range riding is gaining traction among conservation practitioners and producers alike, empirical research on its implementation, effectiveness, and sustainability remains limited. This study examines range riding in the context of the “New West,” focusing on three long-standing programs in western Montana. Through semi-structured interviews with range riders and program coordinators (n= 7) supplemented by document analysis and broader research within the region, we explore how range riding is defined and practiced, its perceived benefits and challenges, and the labor and funding structures that support it. We find that range riding is understood as a flexible and context-specific form of human presence on the landscape, combining elements of predator deterrence, livestock monitoring, and grazing management, while facilitating producer compensation for livestock losses and relationship-building in rural communities. Interviewees described diverse benefits of range riding, including reduced livestock losses, improved communication between riders and ranchers/landowners, and its role in helping sustain working landscapes amid broader socio-economic shifts. However, programs face significant challenges: limited long-term funding, high labor demands, and difficulties in hiring and retaining skilled riders capable of building trust with ranchers and the broader community. Ironically, the success of range riding in reducing depredation can jeopardize its continued funding – a dynamic we term the “paradox of prevention.” Our findings suggest that range riding represents a return to traditional rangeland practices – “cowboying” – amid novel political and economic circumstances. As such, its future depends on durable funding, supportive policy frameworks, and recognition of its role in shaping coexistence between predators and people in the New West.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1604967</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1604967</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Savanna Life – evaluating board game players’ revealed preferences to inform conservation and development planning in the Greater Serengeti-Mara Ecosystem]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-09-23T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Martin Reinhardt Nielsen</author><author>Monique Borgerhoff Mulder</author><author>Gine Roll Skjærvø</author><author>Christian A. Klöckner</author><author>Espen Moe</author><author>Henrik Meilby</author><author>Hans Peter Hartsteen</author><author>Bente Jessen Graae</author>
        <description><![CDATA[IntroductionConservation and development planning is complex and can involve trade-offs and conflicts of interest. Games are an increasingly popular approach to exploring such conflicts and facilitating discussion and future planning. However, few studies have compared the preferences of different stakeholders in such games.MethodsThe board game Savanna Life was played in 12 communities (24 games with 96 players, resulting in 2,889 observations) in 2018 and 2019 within the Greater Serengeti-Mara Ecosystem, characterised by sharp conservation-agropastoral livelihood trade-offs. The game was designed to capture the challenges experienced by communities and provide a safe space for exploring alternative livelihood and investment strategies. We explore how players of different genders, ethnicities, and nationalities maximise their payoffs within the game's logic, allocate preferences across the conservation-development nexus, and change preferences under growing constraints during the game.ResultsUsing revealed preferences for game moves as an indicator, we found that, particularly men, prioritised maximising individual benefits over the game’s primary objective of winning collectively. We also found that players generally preferred moves representing agro-pastoral production over moves aligned with Western development objectives. Moves with negative conservation implications were least preferred. Players also clearly adapted their preferences to increasing constraints. Preferences varied among players based on gender, ethnicity, and nationality, with development and conservation planning implications.DiscussionPost-game follow-up revealed that players considered the game realistic, and they stated planning real-life changes to how they make livelihood decisions based on insights gained while playing the game, suggesting that the game can motivate behavioural change through cognitive transfer. These results support the usefulness of games, such as Savanna Life, in providing insights for a sustainable future. However, the main benefit may be facilitating community debates after the research team departs.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1596859</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1596859</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Review of the united states fish and wildlife service’s 2017 endangered species act delisting rule for the greater yellowstone ecosystem grizzly bear]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-09-05T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Policy and Practice Reviews</category>
        <author>Craig L. Shafer</author>
        <description><![CDATA[The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) population and four other populations were listed as “threatened” in the lower 48 states by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on July 28, 1975, based on the 1973 Endangered Species Act (ESA). An agency Final Rule in the Federal Register, issued on March 29, 2007, made it a distinct population segment (DPS) and removed the GYE population from the ESA listing. After litigation, a federal District Court ordered relisting on September 2, 2009, and vacated the 2007 rule. The USFWS appealed the decision and lost. On March 16, 2016, the agency issued a Proposed Rule to again delist this grizzly bear population, and a 90-day public comment period followed. A review of the public comments and agency responses found in the Federal Register Final Rule of July 31, 2017, reveals that the public perceived that the agency did not always respond fairly or comprehensively to some of the pertinent bear policies. Some issues were overlooked, given inadequate treatment, and suffered from misinformation. These topics include habitat fragmentation, migration and dispersal, habitat connectivity, other population proximity, private land, and others. The 2017 rule also delisted the GYE grizzly bear. After the USFWS objected, a federal Circuit Court agreed with a lower District Court that the 2017 delisting rule be vacated and the GYE grizzly bear be relisted. A Federal Register notice issued on September 24, 2018, affirmed that action. On March 31, 2021, the agency changed its position and recommended continued listing of the GYE grizzly bear. Congress introduced legislation from 2023-2025 to delist the GYE and NCDE grizzly bear populations. Responding to State petitions to delist, the agency concluded on January 20, 2025, that the lower-48 grizzly bears should remain listed (USFWS 2025). Although the topic of the 2017 delisting rule is now eight years old, the extent to which the USFWS did not respond adequately to certain topics is informative and timely since the agency could be compelled to write more delisting rules and respond to more public comments in the future.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1646126</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1646126</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Exploring community participation in environmental conservation: insights from Addo Elephant National Park in South Africa]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-08-15T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Zamikhaya Gladwell Gotyi</author><author>Nontle Handi</author>
        <description><![CDATA[IntroductionProtected areas (PAs) are central to global biodiversity conservation as they preserve nature, ecosystems, and cultural values. In South Africa, PAs were historically governed through top-down, exclusionary models rooted in colonial legacies that prioritized ecological protection over community rights and knowledge. This approach limited local access, fostered resentment, and increased management challenges such as poaching. Subsequently, conservation discourse has shifted toward participatory governance, community-based natural resource management (CBNRM), and co-management to promote more equitable and sustainable outcomes. This study explores the extent and nature of local community participation in environmental conservation at Addo Elephant National Park in South Africa, using the lens of Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM). MethodThis was a qualitative case study research, which used purposive and  convenient sampling techniques to recruit a sample of 34 participants. Interviews, focus groups and field observations were used to collect data from the participants, which was then thematically analysed.ResultsFindings reveal a tripartite model of community engagement: structured involvement through local NGOs, government-led initiatives such as the Extended Public Works Programme, and isolated voluntary actions driven by cultural values. DiscussionWhile formal participation programmes provide economic incentives that mobilize participation, individual efforts, particularly among women, reflect a deep-rooted, intrinsic commitment to environmental stewardship. The study concludes that sustainable conservation requires an integrated approach that combines institutional support with recognition of informal, culturally embedded practices.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1616511</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1616511</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Advancing the science of environmental justice in the international wildlife trade pathway: summary for CITES policy makers]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-07-14T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Policy and Practice Reviews</category>
        <author>Nicholas King</author><author>Gunārs Platais</author><author>Jamie K. Reaser</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1615552</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1615552</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Editorial: Preventing zoonoses. Promoting biophilia]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-05-30T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Editorial</category>
        <author>Jamie K. Reaser</author><author>Hongying Li</author><author>Isla M. Kirkey</author><author>Thomas H. Beery</author><author>Sean Southey</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1527844</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1527844</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Household perceptions regarding bats and willingness to pay for their conservation within Mount Elgon Biosphere Reserve of Uganda]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-05-23T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Aggrey Siya</author><author>Innocent B. Rwego</author><author>Eric Sande</author><author>Robert M. Kityo</author><author>Charles Masembe</author><author>Rebekah C. Kading</author>
        <description><![CDATA[IntroductionBats play critical roles not only in sustaining ecosystems but also human livelihoods across different scales. Despite such values, their populations continue to be threatened mainly by human activities causing their decline. Moreover, recent zoonotic diseases outbreaks have increased negative attitudes towards this taxon further threatening their populations. This study sought to contribute to bat conservation programs by providing scientific data on community willingness to pay for bat conservation within Mount Elgon Biosphere Reserve in Uganda.MethodsWe employed cross-sectional survey design using semi structured interview questionnaires to gather data on the willingness to pay for bat conservation as well as factors associated within Mount Elgon Biosphere Reserve of Uganda. Households were the unit of analysis and were sampled using simple random sampling techniques. Data collected was analyzed using descriptive and relational analyses.ResultsRespondents indicated their willingness to contribute a mean monetary value of UgX 794.97 (~ USD 0.21 Oanda rates as of September 03rd, 2024). This bid amount was associated with household size (p = 0.02) and lower education levels (p = 0.01). Increased household size as well as higher education levels undermined willingness to pay for conservation of bats. Gender and years lived in the area had a positive effect on willingness to pay for bat conservation. In terms of knowledge of bats, this study indicated understanding of some aspects of bats e.g., role in pollination and reproduction. However, there was poor knowledge on other aspects e.g., seed dispersion and other ecological values. Regarding the general environment, communities indicated environment to play critical roles in their livelihoods and ought to be protected.DiscussionHuman communities within Mount Elgon have positive attitudes towards bats and are willing to contribute to their conservation, including monetary terms. Interventions targeting bat conservation thus ought to integrate human dimensions. This will contribute to restoring bat populations and local, regional and global scales.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1613910</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1613910</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Editorial: Advancing the science of environmental justice in the international wildlife trade]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-05-22T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Editorial</category>
        <author>Jamie K. Reaser</author><author>Meredith L. Gore</author><author>Ines Arroyo-Quiroz</author><author>Isla M. Kirkey</author><author>Nicholas King</author><author>Gunars Platais</author>
        <description></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1551597</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1551597</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Utilization of fauna resources for therapeutic purposes as a barrier to species justice advocacy in Nigeria]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-05-22T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Taiwo Kabiru Adebowale</author><author>Opemipo Alaba Ijose</author><author>Bolade Bosede Ibiyomi</author><author>Oluyinka O. Akintunde</author><author>Oladapo O. Oduntan</author><author>Israel Oluyinka Oloyede Osunsina</author><author>Aishah Adeola Shobowale</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Efforts to reduce the irrational exploitation of wildlife, aimed at achieving species justice, continue to be challenged by the persistent demand for animal parts and derivatives in formulating alternative medicines in certain regions of Nigeria. This study focuses on the Kuto, Iberekodo, Itoku, and Lafenwa markets in Ogun State, known for the many traditional medical practitioners relying on these markets for alternative remedies. Data were collected through a semi-structured questionnaire distributed randomly to 165 traditional medicinal vendors. The survey identified 49 animal species of conservation concern; these are categorized as follows: two molluscs, two amphibians, two insects, five fish, eight reptiles, nine birds, and 21 mammals. Various animal parts are traded for spiritual empowerment and disease treatment in these markets. This trade negatively impacts conservation efforts and undermines the collective endeavors of all stakeholders to promote species justice in Nigeria.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1587169</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1587169</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Veterinary clinicians as One Health messengers: opportunities for preventing zoonoses while promoting biophilia in the United States]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-05-19T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Perspective</category>
        <author>Macon Overcast</author>
        <description><![CDATA[One Health is a transdisciplinary approach to health science that recognizes the linked and interdependent ecology of environmental, human, and animal health. Effective communication of zoonotic disease risks through a One Health framework presents an opportunity to both prevent emerging infectious diseases and enhance public appreciation for wildlife and conservation, herein termed biophilia. While veterinary practitioners have historically played a pivotal role in public health and conservation, structural changes in the veterinary profession—including the dominance of companion animal practice, fee-for-service models, and corporate consolidation—limit their potential as One Health communicators, and thus wildlife conservation advocates. Additionally, the human-animal bond is often singularly framed as a health resource for pet owners and companion animals, neglecting its broader role within communities and its connection to other social, ecological, and epidemiological networks that include human and wildlife populations. This article outlines key constraints facing veterinarians as One Health communicators and proposes two solutions to integrate preventive zoonoses messaging and biophilia promotion within veterinary clinical practice: (1) the human-animal bond should be reconceptualized within veterinary clinical sciences as a community-level resource akin to natural capital, and (2) the veterinary extension workforce should be expanded to include agents facilitating local conservation and public health information exchange with companion animal veterinarians. Through these solutions, he veterinary profession can further enhance its principal role in One Health. Such efforts would empower veterinarians to communicate about zoonotic disease risks and conservation, ensuring that One Health principles are embedded in everyday clinical interactions and broader community initiatives.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1541179</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1541179</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Zoonosis and the law: a case study of legal game meat regulation and control in Zambia]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-04-24T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Batsirai Alexander Mukanganwa</author><author>Farah Aisyah Sukmawati</author><author>Sara Wilhelmina Erasmus</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Globally, game meat production is increasing. Yet, in many countries, game meat supply chains are not formally regulated and traceability issues have also been raised. As a consequence, there is an increased risk of zoonotic disease outbreaks. Thus, there is a growing call for a greater role of law and policy (environmental justice) in game animal and game meat products to secure animal and human health. Zambia is one of the countries where game meat production is increasing and legally traded. There is a paucity of information on Zambian laws, regulations, and policies governing the game meat trade. To understand this phenomenon in light of environmental justice concerns, we conducted a case study analyzing the Zambian regulatory framework and policies related to the game meat supply chain. The study included a review of Zambian laws and policies that address the game meat chain, focused on game meat zoonosis risks, and interviews with stakeholders in the game meat supply chain. This was followed by a zoonoses vulnerability assessment of the chain prompted by the absence of specific game meat regulations. The policy analysis revealed a lack of specific regulations governing game meat safety, with limited control over game meat along the supply chain. Several gaps in the law and policy frameworks were identified. To enhance game meat safety and reduce zoonotic disease transmission along the game meat supply chain, the use of a zoonotic control framework is recommended. We conclude with a discussion of the international implications of this Zambian use case.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1554076</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1554076</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Protecting urban wildlife fauna, fighting zoonoses, and preventing biophobia in Brazil]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-04-22T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Policy and Practice Reviews</category>
        <author>Louise Bach Kmetiuk</author><author>Christina Pettan-Brewer</author><author>Vivien Midori Morikawa</author><author>Vanessa Negrini</author><author>Wagner Antonio Chiba de Castro</author><author>Paulo Maiorka</author><author>Alexander Welker Biondo</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Biophobia has increased worldwide, particularly in high-income countries, leading to the loss of natural interactions and fewer health and wellbeing benefits for humans and animals. Wildlife avoidance in Brazilian urban settings has been mostly directed to synanthropic species (so-called “harmful fauna”) due to the risk of zoonosis and mostly involves bats, capybaras, opossums, and monkeys. Additionally, feral cats and stray dogs prey on vulnerable wildlife fauna, decreasing biodiversity. Wildlife protection groups have contributed to this biophobia by demanding the capture and relocation of local wildlife to distant states and federal parks. Nonetheless, some Brazilian state capitals peacefully coexist with steady or growing urban wildlife. Accordingly, this study aimed to present initiatives for wildlife protection, zoonosis surveillance, and biophobia prevention in Curitiba, the eighth-largest Brazilian city in the world and considered among the most sustainable cities in Latin America. Instead of sole sustainability, the One Health approach has been applied to address animal, human, and environmental health as part of city priorities, including free-of-charge veterinary services, basic school education, and a newly established public veterinary hospital. Animal Protection Services, City Secretary of Environment, has promoted substantial improvements in pet guardianship and urban wildlife fauna protection, with an updated city wildlife inventory, attendance, and release of native fauna into city parks. Meanwhile, the Zoonoses Surveillance Unit (ZSU), City Secretary of Public Health, has worked daily to prevent zoonoses and other public health issues, particularly bat rabies, with minimal impact on city wildlife. Children’s outreach and educational handbooks, inserted into teaching content in basic schools, are used to prevent biophobia in future generations. In summary, Curitiba may serve as a model for the One Health approach (in addition to sustainability) for the concomitant improvement of animal health and wildlife protection in major cities in Brazil and worldwide.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1508158</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1508158</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Delisting the Grizzly bear from the Endangered Species Act: shifting politics and political discourse in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-04-16T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Original Research</category>
        <author>Sofia Mollett</author><author>Iree Wheeler</author><author>Brandon Asay</author><author>Joseph Holbrook</author><author>Tommy Furland</author><author>Hannah Manire</author><author>Andrea Miranda Paez</author><author>Steelle S. Scearce</author><author>Tarissa Spoonhunter</author><author>Temple Stoellinger</author><author>Janna R. Willoughby</author><author>Kelly H. Dunning</author>
        <description><![CDATA[IntroductionAs the Endangered Species Act (ESA) marks its 50th anniversary, it remains one of the most influential wildlife conservation laws globally. Designed to protect endangered species and their habitats, the ESA sets recovery benchmarks, with the ultimate goal of delisting species once these criteria are met. However, delisting has become a politically charged issue in recent decades, offering a critical case study for the long-term efficacy of the ESA. Our manuscript examines this dynamic through the lens of a high-profile case: the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the Intermountain West region of the United States. We explore the complex process of species delisting, with research questions focusing on the political actors involved in grizzly bear delisting and their perspectives on the process.Materials and methodsTo address these questions, we analyzed 752 policy documents, news articles, and court rulings, extracting 2,832 quotes from key political stakeholders. Using a structural topic model and inductive thematic coding.ResultsWe identified five key threads of political discourse surrounding grizzly bear delisting: scientific uncertainty, the role of regulated hunting, human-wildlife conflict, increased state-level management, and the surpassing of recovery goals. Our analysis also highlights which political actors most commonly advance these arguments and how their roles have shifted over time. Notably, elected legislators, legal advocates, and non-governmental organizations are increasingly influential in wildlife policy, overshadowing the traditional authority of executive branch officials and agency scientists.Conclusions and recommendationsThese findings underscore the importance of understanding political discourse and actor dynamics in addressing ESA policy disputes, offering insights into how the law may continue to evolve and how future conflicts might be resolved.]]></description>
      </item><item>
        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1578773</guid>
        <link>https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2025.1578773</link>
        <title><![CDATA[Responsible biophilia for zoonosis prevention through a cultural lens]]></title>
        <pubdate>2025-04-11T00:00:00Z</pubdate>
        <category>Perspective</category>
        <author>Hongying Li</author>
        <description><![CDATA[Human affinity for nature (“biophilia”) brings substantial health and ecological benefits and fosters environmental stewardship. However, close human-nature interactions can lead to conservation challenges and increase the risk of zoonoses. This paradox raises critical questions about how to balance public health, biodiversity conservation, and sustainable development, and understanding these dilemmas presents opportunities for integrated approaches seeking synergies rather than trade-offs. This perspective explores the complexities of these intricate challenges by examining cases that demonstrated the interconnections between biophilia and zoonotic risks and their implications for conservation, public health, and local livelihood. Acknowledging the role of social and cultural perspectives in shaping human-nature interactions, this perspective highlights the importance of integrating traditional knowledge and practices and tailored risk communications into community-centered initiatives for zoonotic risk mitigation. The discussion proposes a responsible biophilia approach that embraces biodiversity conservation as a primary strategy for zoonosis prevention. By fostering responsible biophilia through a transdisciplinary and culturally relevant approach, we can align conservation, public health, and sustainable local livelihood, transforming biophilia-based human-nature interaction into opportunities for community health and resilience.]]></description>
      </item>
      </channel>
    </rss>