Public perceptions of trophy hunting are pragmatic, not dogmatic

Hare, Darragh1 ; Dickman, Amy1 ; Johnson, Paul1 ; Rono, Betty2 ; Mutinhima, Yolanda3 ; Sutherland, Chris4 ; Kulunge, Salum5 ; Sibanda, Lovemore1 ; Mandoloma, Lessah1 ; Kimaili, David6

Published Feb 09, 2024 on Dryad. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.bvq83bkfr

Data files

Feb 09, 2024 version files 272.33 KB

final.data.csv

270.02 KB
README.md

2.31 KB

Abstract

Fierce international debates rage over whether trophy hunting is socially acceptable, especially when people from the Global North hunt well-known animals in sub-Saharan Africa. We used an online vignette experiment to investigate public perceptions of the acceptability of trophy hunting in sub-Saharan Africa among people who live in urban areas of the USA, UK and South Africa. Acceptability depended on specific attributes of different hunts as well as participants’ characteristics. Zebra hunts were more acceptable than elephant hunts, hunts that would provide meat to local people were more acceptable than hunts in which meat would be left for wildlife, and hunts in which revenues would support wildlife conservation were more acceptable than hunts in which revenues would support either economic development or hunting enterprises. Acceptability was generally lower among participants from the UK and those who more strongly identified as an animal protectionist, but higher among participants with more formal education, who more strongly identified as a hunter, or who would more strongly prioritize people over wild animals. Overall, acceptability was higher when hunts would produce tangible benefits for local people, suggesting that members of three urban publics adopt more pragmatic positions than are typically evident in polarized international debates.

README: Public perceptions of trophy hunting are pragmatic, not dogmatic

Data underpinning analyses presented in Hare et al (2024), ‘Public perceptions of trophy hunting are pragmatic, not dogmatic’.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2023.1638

Description of the Data and file structure

This data set includes all columns necessary to replicate model fitting, selection, and comparisons outlined in the manuscript.

Variable names mean:

education = participant’s level of formal education
people.animals = whether a participant would prioritise people or wild animals if their interests clash
individuals.groups = whether a participant would prioritise individual wild animals or groups of wild animals if their interests clash
hunter = whether a participant identifies as a hunter
conservationist = whether a participant identifies as an advocate for environmental conservation
animal.protectionist = whether a participant identifies as an advocate for animal protection
human.rights = whether a participant identifies as an advocate for human rights
country.1 = the participant's country of residence
vignette = summary of which vignette the participant randomly received (first letters of the level of each expermiental variable described in that vignette)
animal = which animal would be hunted, as stipulated in vignette
meat = how meat from the hunt would be used, as stipulated in vignette
revenue = how revenue from the hunt would be used, as stipulated in vignette
response.text = how acceptable or unacceptable the participant indicated the hunt described in the vignette would be
gender = participant’s gender
age = participant’s age
rural.past.combined = whether the participant grew up in a rural or urban location

Sharing/access Information

There are no other publicly accessible versions of the data.

Data was derived from the following sources:
An online experiment hosted on the Qualtrics platform.

Code/Software

The accompanying annotated script, ‘Perceptions of hunting script_Dryad’ replicates the model fitting, selection, and comparisons outlined in the manuscript.