Abstract
AbstractIllegal trade and human‐wildlife conflict are two key drivers of biodiversity loss and are recognized as leading threats to large carnivores. Although human‐wildlife conflict involving jaguars (Panthera onca) has received significant attention in the past, less is known about traditional use or commercial trade in jaguar body parts, including their potential links with retaliatory killing. Understanding the drivers of jaguar killing, trade and consumption is necessary to develop appropriate jaguar conservation strategies, particularly as demand for jaguar products appears to be rising due to Chinese demand. We interviewed 1107 rural households in north‐western Bolivia, an area with an active history of human–jaguar conflict, which has also been at the epicentre of recent jaguar trade cases. We collected information on participants' experiences with jaguars, their jaguar killing, trading and consuming behaviours and potential drivers of these behaviours. We found that the relationships between local people and jaguars are complex and are driven largely by traditional practices, opportunism, human–jaguar conflict and market incentives from foreign and domestic demand, in the absence of law awareness and enforcement. Addressing jaguar trade and building human–jaguar coexistence will require a multifaceted approach that considers the multiple drivers of jaguar killing, trade and consumption, from foreign and local demand to human–jaguar conflict.
Highlights
The relationship between humans and wildlife is complex, varying across locations, cultures and taxa, and evolving along with societies’ changing values towards nature (Frank and Glikman, 2019). The study of these relationships has been dominated by an anthropocentric focus, which separates humans from the natural world and defines their interactions with wildlife as ‘human-wildlife conflict’ (HWC), or the ‘struggles that emerge when the presence or behaviour of wildlife poses actual or perceived, direct and recurring threat to human interests or needs’ (IUCN, 2020)
The expanding scholarship on human-wildlife interactions continues to emphasize HWC, its definition has evolved over time, acknowledging that many instances of HWC are disagreements between groups of people over wildlife (Peterson et al, 2010; Redpath et al, 2013; IUCN, 2020)
Many large carnivores have symbolic meanings and practical values for human societies around the world (Alves et al, 2013), their negative impacts on human interests and needs have led to widespread persecution, turning human-wildlife conflict into a leading cause of large carnivore decline (Inskip and Zimmermann, 2009; Ripple et al, Animal Conservation (2021) – a 2021 The Authors
Summary
The relationship between humans and wildlife is complex, varying across locations, cultures and taxa, and evolving along with societies’ changing values towards nature (Frank and Glikman, 2019). The study of these relationships has been dominated by an anthropocentric focus, which separates humans from the natural world and defines their interactions with wildlife as ‘human-wildlife conflict’ (HWC), or the ‘struggles that emerge when the presence or behaviour of wildlife poses actual or perceived, direct and recurring threat to human interests or needs’ (IUCN, 2020). Animal Conservation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Zoological Society of London. 1
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
