Speaking of the wild: Australian attitudes to wildlife
Creators: name: Aslin, Heather Jean
Publisher: name: The Australian National University
Year: 1996
Subjects: wildlife, Australian attitudes, social values, biodiversity, human dimensions

description: This enquiry examines the attitudes and values of Australians towards their country’s wildlife, and addresses a primary research aim of constructing or identifying a conceptual framework for these attitudes and values. Its secondary research aims are to identify the range of attitudes and values towards wildlife among Australians, how they can be described and values identified in eco-philosophical, sociological and psychological literature. I examine conceptual and empirical bases for distinguishing different types; and methodological approaches used by researchers investigating their distribution in western societies. In considering ways to answer the research questions suggested by this literature and differing approaches to social enquiry, I argue for a methodological stance incorporating structural and interpretive/phenomenological approaches, and addressing cultural, social and individual levels. In the structural approach I describe and categorise some current wildlife interest groups and organisations at eight sites (Sydney, Canberra, Cairns, Melbourne, Alice Springs, Adelaide, Echuca and Cobar); and use similar categories to examine relevant articles published over a period of a year in the national newspaper, The Australian. In the interpretive/phenomenological approach I use theoretical or purposive sampling techniques to identify and interview 51 Australians with specialised interests in wildlife, living mainly in and around Sydney, Canberra, Cairns, Melbourne and Adelaide. They include staff of relevant government agencies; non-government conservation, environment, industry and hunting organisations; voluntary wildlife carers and rehabilitators; veterinarians; educators; and self-employed farmers, nature writers and wildlife artists. I also conduct seven group discussions with people from the general community, incorporating approximately equal numbers of men and women, and covering major occupational sectors, differently-sized population centres, and age ranges among the adult Australian population. These group discussions are held in Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra, Echuca and Cobar, and involve 54 people. Interviews and group discussion are semi-structured and I ask participants mainly open-ended questions covering wildlife perceptions/definitions, attitudes/values, behaviour/experiences, social issues/goals, and demographic characteristics. I use mainly qualitative techniques to analyse responses, taking respondents’ own words as primary data. I develop response categories for the various questions, summarise responses by categories, and make comparisons within and between the different date sets. Through this analysis I identify emergent themes and concepts giving insight into answers to the research questions. My findings provide evidence of a range of strongly-held views about wildlife. These views relate to interviewees’ and group members’ situations, particularly social situations, and to learning experiences in these situations. The most significant of these learning experiences are ones associated socialisation into major life situations and social roles – family/childhood situations, gender roles and occupational/interest group roles. So these emerge as major influences shaping attitudes and values. I identify an explanatory conceptual framework based in experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984). This draws connections between the range of occupations in western societies, cognitive styles, and bodies of social knowledge. This implies that people learn different cognitive styles, and bodies of social knowledge. It implies that people learn different cognitive styles through being socialised into occupational roles, and by extension, other roles such as gender and interest group roles. These differences are in a sense entrenched n the structure of western societies. People’s current situations, and the attitudes corresponding with these situations, represent a compromise between socially-structured role constraints and individual preferences, aptitudes or abilities. I relate this to interviewees’ and group members’ situations, explain how this approach satisfies the research aims, and show how it is consistent with other researchers’ findings about wildlife attitudes. In discussing the social conflict theme emerging from interviews and group discussions, I draw upon Serpell (1986), who identifies the role learnt psychological distancing mechanisms play in helping people engaged in occupations re recreational pursuits which require killing animals, to avoid emotional conflicts. These distancing mechanisms help these people to see individual animals in objectified and mechanistic ways conflicting with the personalised ways they may be seen by social groups. The contact theme I identify points to the importance of personal experiences with wildlife in influencing attitudes, and suggests Australians need to be encouraged to integrate wildlife into their everyday lives if conservation goals are to be achieved.