Suchergebnisse

Abstract Controversies over large carnivores are often interpreted as clashes between rural traditionalism and urban modernity. Rural communities, however, have never been culturally monolithic, and modernization will increase the diversity. To probe such diverse and changing attitudes towards nature, I conducted a qualitative study of young people in a rural community in eastern Norway. Contrary to popular images of such communities as unified against "pests," all typical views of the carnivore issue were present. Those in favor of the large carnivores were typically middle‐class youths with a strong "outward" orientation, while those who wanted to shoot the predators were mostly working‐class boys with strong ties to the local hunting culture. This pattern was interpreted as a conflict between dominant and subordinate forms of knowledge, and between abstraction‐oriented and production‐oriented cultural forms. Aside from the growth of the pro‐carnivore middle‐class segments, the most significant effect of modernization appeared to be the removal of many young people from the subject matter of the conflict. A "subculturalization" of the working‐class hunting culture also could be discerned, however.

AbstractQualitative studies have indicated that the illegal killing of wolves is often attributed a protest dimension. However, we have limited knowledge about the factors that impact this judgement. The present study investigates views on illegal wolf killing among Norwegian hunters and connects these views to background factors, hunting cultures, anti‐elitism and the legitimacy of environmental institutions, probing the existence of a 'counterpublic' where killing wolves is seen as justified resistance. Only a minority tolerated the activity, but compared to other hunting‐related offences, killing a wolf illegally was seen as 'not serious' by the largest group. Hunters with limited education, living in rural areas, and who were motivated by a 'tradition and stewardship' ethos when hunting, were more inclined to accept illegal killing. Anti‐elitism and lack of trust in environmental institutions were even stronger predictors. We conclude that hunting‐related issues are not among the prime drivers of support for illegal wolf hunting. Rather, it is typically part of a worldview that reflects a rural subaltern experience, comprising elements of cultural resistance. While the political dimension is not always articulated, overlooking it and treating illegal killing simply as 'crime' may stoke conflicts and fortify an understanding of power relations that already drives resistance.

Qualitative studies have indicated that the illegal killing of wolves is often attributed a protest dimension. However, we have limited knowledge about the factors that impact this judgement. The present study investigates views on illegal wolf killing among Norwegian hunters and connects these views to background factors, hunting cultures, anti-elitism and the legitimacy of environmental institutions, probing the existence of a 'counterpublic' where killing wolves is seen as justified resistance. Only a minority tolerated the activity, but compared to other hunting-related offences, killing a wolf illegally was seen as 'not serious' by the largest group. Hunters with limited education, living in rural areas, and who were motivated by a 'tradition and stewardship' ethos when hunting, were more inclined to accept illegal killing. Anti-elitism and lack of trust in environmental institutions were even stronger predictors. We conclude that huntingrelated issues are not among the prime drivers of support for illegal wolf hunting. Rather, it is typically part of a worldview that reflects a rural subaltern experience, comprising elements of cultural resistance. While the political dimension is not always articulated, overlooking it and treating illegal killing simply as 'crime' may stoke conflicts and fortify an understanding of power relations that already drives resistance. ; publishedVersion

Restoring species to their former range has become a major goal in official environmental policy. Under strict protection, the expansion of a new wolf population has been taking place on the Scandinavian Peninsula since the late 1980s, leading to much controvery in rural areas. Most research on conflicts concerning wolves has taken antagonistic attitudes as a point of departure. In this article we question such an approach. Taking social representations as our framework for analysis, our aim has been to find out how wolves are perceived and whether an analysis of such cultural meanings could contribute to a better understanding of the conflicts accompanying wolf recovery. Focus group interviews in two areas in Eastern Norway suggest that it is not antagonistic interpretations of the carnivores' nature that fuel the conflicts over wolves, but different views as to whether they belong in the areas where they are now found. Yet, at the same time, it is against the undisputed background of the wolf's perceived character that the negotiations over their belonging to Norwegian nature make sense. We so argue that the theory of social representations provides a comprehensive framework for studying the complex relationship between consensus and diverging opinions, and between culturally embedded representations and conflict, that appears to lie at the heart of such issues.

This article is based on a qualitative study of young working–class men who are dedicated hunters and hardcore wolf adversaries. Our aim is to make sense of their attitudes and practices regarding the re–appearance of wolves. They see the wolves as impeding their life projects: being hunters and outdoorsmen. Therefore, we discuss attitude formation in the light of theories of identity, paying special attention to the idea that identity formation is strongly affected by individualization in 'late modernity'. Norwegian media tend to depict rural ways of life as rooted in traditionalism, implying an antagonism between the modern and the traditional along an urban–rural axis. Yet, even if important choices made by the young men include distinct elements of local tradition, these choices are no less reflexive than those made by more mobile peers. The article argues that the young hunters are simultaneously traditional and modern and that they transgress such artificial antagonisms through their everyday practices.

AbstractControversies over the return of large carnivores (e.g. wolves) are often interpreted as clashes between rural traditionalism and urban modernity. Rural communities, however, have never been culturally monolithic, and modernization increases their diversity. However, the popular image is one of rural communities united against vermin and urban romantics. An important reason for this is probably the successful construction of the anti‐carnivore front as a last line of defence against destructive forces threatening rural life. Drawing on examples from a study in Østerdalen, Norway, the struggle against wolf protection is discussed as an instance of symbolic construction of community. Images of a threatened community are vital to the self‐understanding of the wolf adversaries, but cleavages run through the alliance. Three principal groups may be identified: sheep farmers, landowners who lease hunting, and people with strong ties to traditional land use practices (primarily hunting) and a rural working‐class culture. These groups have not always been allies, and conflicts of interest run through the 'resistance front'. The task here is to identify the social forces that now bring them together, and to explain why the carnivore issue is well suited as a significant component in their symbolic construction of community.