UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Integrating ethical assessment and media content analysis to explore social conflicts over large carnivores

Identification

Clé publique

radar:r-83878ab4ba837c74646f3aba5f274db7

Auteurs

Simone Basile · Elena Mercugliano · S. Carraro · Pierfrancesco Biasetti · Giulia Mascarello · Anna Clara Santiago Nunes Pinto · Marco Antonio Zago · Veronica Nanni · S. Seet · Roberto Guadagnini · Barbara de Mori

Année déclarée

2025

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-13T12:47:33.314991+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-13T12:47:33.314991+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

University of Padua · Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research · Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale delle Venezie · Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia · Water Research Institute · National Research Council

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

DE · IT

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Human-Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) present ethically complex scenarios that intersect social, ecological, and animal welfare considerations. Conflicts are further complicated when extreme events, such as large carnivore attacks on humans, attract intense media attention. Media coverage plays a pivotal role in shaping public risk perception and tolerance toward wildlife, influencing policy decisions. While media content analysis has been applied to HWCs, the representation of stakeholder voices and underlying ethical dimensions in media narratives remains underexplored. To address this, we developed a novel approach integrating ethical assessment and media analysis and tested it on the case of JJ4, a brown bear that fatally attacked a person in Northern Italy. Using the Ethical Matrix (EM), we mapped stakeholders' (both human and non-human) ethically relevant demands and analyzed their portrayal in online media through reported statements. Based on 76 reports and 336 quotes, our findings revealed imbalances in stakeholder representation, with animal rights and welfare advocates dominating the discourse, while others were notably underrepresented, along with their concerns. Media primarily framed the conflict as a clash between public safety and animal welfare, overlooking broader environmental considerations crucial for wildlife management, with the risk of oversimplifying the complexities of HWCs and further exacerbating opinion polarization. These results highlight the need for more pluralistic media portrayals of HWCs that reflect the full scope of ethical considerations and stakeholder perspectives. The integrated approach we adopted provides actionable insights for decision-makers to foster more balanced and informed management strategies. • Human-wildlife conflicts generate social conflicts that need to be mitigated. • Media influences human tolerance and perception through public debate. • Ethical analysis provides a complete map of conflicts. • Merging ethical and media analysis allowed the identification of gaps in the media. • Integrated approaches promote fair and balanced decision-making.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

https://openalex.org/W4412419709

DOI

10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111342

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

article

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Éditeurs

Elsevier BV

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1

• Document · https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111342

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.