IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i2p146-d491791.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Landscape Change Analysis and Stakeholder Perspective to Identify Driving Forces of Human–Wildlife Interactions

Author

Listed:
  • Mihai Mustățea

    (Faculty of Geography, Doctoral School Simion Mehedinti, University of Bucharest, 1 Bd. N. Bălcescu, 010041 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Ileana Pătru-Stupariu

    (Department of Regional Geography and Environment, Faculty of Geography, University of Bucharest, 1 Bd. N. Bălcescu, 010041 Bucharest, Romania
    Institute of Research of University of Bucharest, ICUB, 050095 Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

Human–wildlife interactions (HWI) were frequent in the post-socialist period in the mountain range of Central European countries where forest habitats suffered transitions into built-up areas. Such is the case of the Upper Prahova Valley from Romania. In our study, we hypothesized that the increasing number of HWI after 1990 could be a potential consequence of woodland loss. The goal of our study was to analyse the effects of landscape changes on HWI. The study consists of the next steps: (i) applying 450 questionnaires to local stakeholders (both citizens and tourists) in order to collect data regarding HWI temporal occurrences and potential triggering factors; (ii) investigating the relation between the two variables through the Canonical Correspondence Analysis (CCA); (iii) modelling the landscape spatial changes between 1990 and 2018 for identifying areas with forest loss; (iv) overlapping the distribution of both the households affected by HWI and areas with loss of forested ecosystems. The local stakeholders indicate that the problematic species are the brown bear ( Ursus arctos ), the wild boar ( Sus scrofa ), the red fox ( Vulpes vulpes ) and the grey wolf ( Canis lupus ). The number of animal–human interactions recorded an upward trend between 1990 and 2018, and the most significant driving factors were the regulation of hunting practices, the loss of habitats, and artificial feeding. The landscape change analysis reveals that between 1990 and 2018, the forest habitats were replaced by built-up areas primarily on the outskirts of settlements, these areas coinciding with frequent HWI. The results are valid for both forest ecosystems conservation in the region, wildlife management, and human infrastructures durable spatial planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Mihai Mustățea & Ileana Pătru-Stupariu, 2021. "Using Landscape Change Analysis and Stakeholder Perspective to Identify Driving Forces of Human–Wildlife Interactions," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:146-:d:491791
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/146/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/146/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Griffiths, Patrick & Müller, Daniel & Kuemmerle, Tobias & Hostert, Patrick, 2013. "Agricultural land change in the Carpathian ecoregion after the breakdown of socialism and expansion of the European Union," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(4), pages 1-12.
    2. Ileana Pătru-Stupariu & Marioara Pascu & Matthias Bürgi, 2019. "Exploring Tangible and Intangible Heritage and its Resilience as a Basis to Understand the Cultural Landscapes of Saxon Communities in Southern Transylvania (Romania)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, June.
    3. Petru Tudor Stăncioiu & Ioan Dutcă & Marian Cristian Bălăcescu & Ștefan Vasile Ungurean, 2019. "Coexistence with Bears in Romania: A Local Community Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Megan D. Barnes & Ian D. Craigie & Luke B. Harrison & Jonas Geldmann & Ben Collen & Sarah Whitmee & Andrew Balmford & Neil D. Burgess & Thomas Brooks & Marc Hockings & Stephen Woodley, 2016. "Wildlife population trends in protected areas predicted by national socio-economic metrics and body size," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Furgała-Selezniow, Grażyna & Jankun-Woźnicka, Małgorzata & Mika, Mirosław, 2020. "Lake regions under human pressure in the context of socio-economic transition in Central-Eastern Europe: The case study of Olsztyn Lakeland, Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Karol Król & Robert Kao & Józef Hernik, 2019. "The Scarecrow as an Indicator of Changes in the Cultural Heritage of Rural Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Jennifer A. Border & James W. Pearce-Higgins & Chris M. Hewson & Christine Howard & Philip A. Stephens & Stephen G. Willis & Richard A. Fuller & Jeffrey O. Hanson & Henk Sierdsema & Ruud P. B. Foppen , 2025. "Expanding protected area coverage for migratory birds could improve long-term population trends," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Anuțoiu Ana-Gabriela & Danțiș Dragoș & Ionescu Ovidiu, 2024. "Brown Bear a Symbol of Past and Present," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 2365-2376.
    5. Robert Pazúr & Juraj Lieskovský & Matthias Bürgi & Daniel Müller & Tibor Lieskovský & Zhen Zhang & Alexander V. Prishchepov, 2020. "Abandonment and Recultivation of Agricultural Lands in Slovakia—Patterns and Determinants from the Past to the Future," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-22, September.
    6. Alina Cimpoca & Mircea Voiculescu, 2022. "Patterns of Human–Brown Bear Conflict in the Urban Area of Brașov, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Fayet, Catherine M.J. & Reilly, Kate H. & Van Ham, Chantal & Verburg, Peter H., 2022. "What is the future of abandoned agricultural lands? A systematic review of alternative trajectories in Europe," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Cláudio C. Maretti & Sueli Angelo Furlan & Marta de Azevedo Irving & Yasmin Xavier Guimarães Nasri & Camila Gonçalves de Oliveira Rodrigues & Beatriz Barros Aydos & Rodrigo Martins dos Santos & Erika , 2023. "Collaborative Conservation for Inclusive, Equitable, and Effective Systems of Protected and Conserved Areas—Insights from Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-32, December.
    9. Thomas F. Johnson & Nick J. B. Isaac & Agustin Paviolo & Manuela González-Suárez, 2023. "Socioeconomic factors predict population changes of large carnivores better than climate change or habitat loss," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    10. Agnieszka Wnęk & Dawid Kudas & Premysl Stych, 2021. "National Level Land-Use Changes in Functional Urban Areas in Poland, Slovakia, and Czechia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.
    11. Castro, P. & Pedroso, R. & Lautenbach, S. & Vicens, R., 2020. "Farmland abandonment in Rio de Janeiro: Underlying and contributory causes of an announced development," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    12. Lucie Kupková & Ivan Bičík & Leoš Jeleček, 2021. "At the Crossroads of European Landscape Changes: Major Processes of Landscape Change in Czechia since the Middle of the 19th Century and Their Driving Forces," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, January.
    13. Marioara Pascu & Ileana Pătru-Stupariu, 2021. "The Assessment of the Authenticity and Conservation Status of Cultural Landscapes in Southern Transylvania (Romania)," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, February.
    14. Lin Meng & Chuanguang Zhu & Jie Pu & Bo Wen & Wentao Si, 2022. "Study on the Influence Mechanism of Intangible Cultural Heritage Distribution from Man–Land Relationship Perspective: A Case Study in Shandong Province," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-18, August.
    15. Ziqi Meng & Jinwei Dong & Erle C. Ellis & Graciela Metternicht & Yuanwei Qin & Xiao-Peng Song & Sara Löfqvist & Rachael D. Garrett & Xiaopeng Jia & Xiangming Xiao, 2023. "Post-2020 biodiversity framework challenged by cropland expansion in protected areas," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 758-768, July.
    16. Cegielska, Katarzyna & Noszczyk, Tomasz & Kukulska, Anita & Szylar, Marta & Hernik, Józef & Dixon-Gough, Robert & Jombach, Sándor & Valánszki, István & Filepné Kovács, Krisztina, 2018. "Land use and land cover changes in post-socialist countries: Some observations from Hungary and Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-18.
    17. Michał Sobala & Urszula Myga-Piątek & Bartłomiej Szypuła, 2020. "Assessment of Changes in a Viewshed in the Western Carpathians Landscape as a Result of Reforestation," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, November.
    18. Wei Wei & Yuanjun Zhu & Hao Li & Kebin Zhang & Baitian Wang & Xiaohui Yang & Zhongjie Shi, 2018. "Spatio-Temporal Reorganization of Cropland Development in Central Asia during the Post-Soviet Era: A Sustainable Implication in Kazakhstan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    19. Affek, Andrzej N. & Jabs-Sobocińska, Zofia & Wolski, Jacek & Radeloff, Volker C., 2023. "Pockets of persistence of agricultural land use during the socioeconomic shock of forced post-WWII displacements in the Carpathians," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    20. Yakusheva, Natalya, 2019. "Managing protected areas in Central Eastern Europe: Between path-dependence and Europeanisation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:146-:d:491791. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.