Abstract

Simple SummaryThe management of dogs and cats in remote communities is challenging due to limited availability of veterinary services and high reproductive rates in companion animal populations. Support for animal management within communities is also weak, and consequently, programs delivered by external providers rarely achieve sustainable outcomes. An alternative approach whereby communities are engaged in analysing and understanding the issues, and designing solutions themselves, may help to achieve sustainable improvements in animal populations and health management. To test this approach, stakeholders involved with animal management in a remote Australian Aboriginal community were interviewed to gain their perspectives on animal management. By applying frame analysis to understand stakeholders’ perceptions, knowledge and power, interviewees fell into four distinct groups: Indigenous Locals, Indigenous Rangers, Non-Indigenous Locals and Animal Managers. The most important issue identified by all groups was the overpopulation of dogs, but there were differences in their framing of the problem and its causes. Frame analysis achieved the important first step of the process, identifying “What is the issue?”.Companion animal management in Australian remote Aboriginal communities (rAcs) is a complex problem, with multiple stakeholders involved with differing needs, knowledge, power and resources. We present our CoMM4Unity approach, a participatory systemic action research process designed to address such problems. In the first step, frame analysis is used to analyse stakeholders’ perspectives, knowledge types and power dynamics to determine their relative roles in animal management. Twenty individuals were interviewed from stakeholder groups involved in animal management in the remote, island rAc of Wurrumiyanga, Tiwi Islands. Frame analysis indicated that stakeholders aligned into four groups with distinct identity frames, knowledge types and power frames: Indigenous Locals, Indigenous Rangers, Non-Indigenous Locals and Animal Managers. All four groups shared overlapping perceptions about companion animals in Wurrumiyanga, and agreed that dog overpopulation was the primary issue. However, the groups differed in their strength of opinions about how dogs should be managed. Therefore, the situation is not one of diametrically opposing frames but more a misalignment of goals and values. Our application showed that frame analysis can reveal subtle variations in stakeholder groups’ identities, goals and values, and hence how they prioritise management measures.

Highlights

  • Conflict between self-interest and the interest of the collective has a long history [1].These competing objectives are the basis of environmental disputes and natural resource conflicts [2,3], and despite exhaustive efforts, many remain unresolved

  • The Project Map tool in NVIVO did not yield clear differences, as the themes generated were common amongst most interviewees

  • When separated further into subthemes, it was clear that the values and goals behind the themes did vary amongst four groups: Indigenous Locals, Indigenous Land Rangers, Non-locals and Non-Indigenous

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Conflict between self-interest and the interest of the collective has a long history [1]. These competing objectives are the basis of environmental disputes and natural resource conflicts [2,3], and despite exhaustive efforts, many remain unresolved. Many environmental conflicts can be termed “wicked problems”, which have multiple understandings from different stakeholders with differing needs, meaning that there is no true resolution and increasing conflict over a persistent and intractable issue, often causing further, multi-faceted problems [5].

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call