Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10261/118104COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
 SHARE
 CORE
BASE
|
|
| Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE | |
| Título: | (De)legitimising hunting – discourses over the morality of hunting in Europe and eastern Africa |
Autor: | Fischer, Anke; Arroyo, Beatriz CSIC ORCID ; Delibes-Mateos, Miguel CSIC ORCID | Palabras clave: | Consevation Discourse analysis Hunting Legitimacy Morality Moral geography Normativity Wildlife |
Fecha de publicación: | 2013 | Editor: | Elsevier | Citación: | Land Use Policy 32: 261-270 (2013) | Resumen: | Hunting is an activity that appears to provoke – often immediate and strongly pronounced – moral assessments, i.e., judgments of what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. A large body of literature explores these moral arguments, often from a philosophical or normative perspective, focusing on specific types of hunting. However, studies that ground such explorations in empirical, systematically analysed, yet contextualised data seem to be missing. We argue that such an approach is essential to understand conflicts over hunting and wildlife management, and present data from focus group discussions and interviews with hunters, non-hunters and hunting critics across six countries in Europe and eastern Africa. Our findings suggest that moral arguments play an extremely important role in the legitimation and delegitimation of hunting practices through discourse. In particular, study participants referred to the motives of hunters as a factor that, in their eyes, determined the acceptability of hunting practices. Moral argumentations exhibited patterns that were common across study sites, such as a perceived moral superiority of the ‘moderate’ and ‘measured’, and a lack of legitimacy of the ‘excessive’. Implicit orders of hunting motives were used to legitimise types of hunting that were suspected to be contested. On the basis of these findings, we discuss how the moral elements of hunting discourses relate to broader discourses on environmental management, and how these are used to establish (or dispute) the legitimacy of hunting . Our analysis also suggests that there might be more overlap between moral arguments of hunters, non-hunters and hunting critics than popularly assumed, which, where required, could be used as a starting point for conflict management. | Descripción: | et al. | Versión del editor: | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.11.002 | URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/118104 | DOI: | 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.11.002 | ISSN: | 0264-8377 |
| Aparece en las colecciones: | (IREC) Artículos |
Ficheros en este ítem:
| Fichero | Descripción | Tamaño | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legitimacies of hunting .pdf | 665,81 kB | Adobe PDF |  Visualizar/Abrir |
CORE Recommender
SCOPUSTM
Citations
70
checked on 20-abr-2024
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
65
checked on 23-feb-2024
Page view(s)
261
checked on 24-abr-2024
Download(s)
1.072
checked on 24-abr-2024
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Altmetric
NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.