Recent Submissions

• Loading...

  Item type:Item,

  Norms and novelty in the space of reasons: has Brandom forgotten about women?

  (Associazione Pragma, 2025) Dieleman, Susan

  Show more

  Robert B. Brandom builds a vast philosophical system that begins from and depends on the claim that we are concept- or vocabulary-mongering creatures. Philosophy, he claims, is the discipline concerned with reflection on who we are, where who we are is defined discursively, and thus is concerned with reasoning about reasoning. In this article, I interrogate how Brandom’s understanding of “we” ought to be understood in light of the historical exclusion of women from the sorts of rational practices and abilities that are thought to be integral to it. My argument thus corroborates and builds upon recent work suggesting that the problems of epistemic injustice are relevant to, but largely ignored in, Brandom’s project. In short, I contend that Brandom’s theory of discursive normativity, where norms and novelty depend on a particular understanding of the space of reasons, does not provide the necessary theoretical tools to understand the historical exclusion of women from that space, or to explain how they have gained or might gain access to it.

  Show more
• Loading...

  Item type:Item,

  Socio-ecological correlates of wildlife species identification across rural communities in northern Tanzania

  (Wiley, 2025) Raycraft, Justin; Becchina, Reilly; Bettermann, Danielle; Koester, Stephen; Kriegel, Elana; Lindsay, Kiana; Ole, Edwin Maingo; Ramirez, Emily; Spizuco, Bryan; Kiffner, Christian

  Show more

  1. Citizen or community science has the potential to inform wildlife management by including the general public in research and generating datasets on human perceptions of wildlife population dynamics and human–wildlife interactions. These contributions are especially valuable in areas with limited formal capacity for wildlife monitoring. 2. However, people's perceptions are not always reliable and hinge on the accurate classification of species. In the absence of artificial intelligence-supported automatic identification tools or wildlife experts, effectively incorporating people's reports of wildlife sightings into conservation management plans depends on the abilities of people to accurately identify animals (i.e. species literacy). These skills likely vary across human populations in accordance with a range of demographic, geographic and species-specific factors. 3. We carried out 680 semi-structured interviews with rural citizens, randomly selected along transects in 25 villages across northern Tanzania. We showed photographs of 17 mammal species to participants and assessed species identification ability. Using a generalized linear mixed model within a Bayesian framework that accommodated the hierarchical data structure and non-independence of the data, we tested specific hypotheses regarding the correlations of species identification accuracy with human demographic (ethnicity, education, age, wealth, gender), geographic (Human Footprint Index [HFI], distance to protected areas, district) and species-specific (conservation status, activity patterns, body mass, diet) variables. 4. Most respondents accurately identified key wildlife species commonly involved in human–wildlife interactions. Gender strongly influenced species identification accuracy, with men three times more likely to correctly identify species as compared to women. Formal education was negatively correlated with species identification accuracy. 5. Respondents identified large species more accurately than smaller ones, whereas other species traits were not markedly correlated with identification accuracy. Distance to the nearest protected area, district and the HFI score in the area surrounding the household of the respondent were not markedly associated with species identification accuracy. 6. Our results show that rural residents in northern Tanzania can reliably identify key wildlife species implicated in consequential human–wildlife interactions, though identification accuracy was affected by a combination of demographic and species-specific factors that must be appropriately contextualized. This finding validates studies of local perceptions of wildlife populations and community reports of human–wildlife interactions. Finally, we discuss how local perspectives on wildlife can be applied to improve human–wildlife coexistence.

  Show more
• Loading...

  Item type:Item,

  Sharing landscapes with megaherbivores: human-elephant interactions northeast of Tarangire National Park

  (Elsevier, 2024) Raycraft, Justin; Tanner, George; Ole, Edwin Maingo

  Show more

  The rising elephant population in Tarangire National Park of northern Tanzania has led to increasing human-elephant interactions in dispersal areas to the northeast of the park. While the movement dynamics of elephants across the landscape are well documented, anthropological dimensions of human-elephant coexistence warrant more research. The present study used stratified random sampling to survey 1076 people living across twelve villages surrounding Manyara Ranch and Randilen Wildlife Management Area (WMA) about their lived experiences, perceptions, attitudes, and tolerance towards elephants. Villages between Manyara Ranch and Randilen WMA reported regular conflicts with elephants, while those to the west of the ranch did not consider elephants to be a major concern. Crop raiding was particularly frequent in Makuyuni, Lengoolwa, Mswakini Juu, Mswakini, Lemooti, and Nafco. Economic impacts of elephant crop raiding ranged from as low as $4USD per household per year in Lolkisale to approximately $812 per year in Mswakini, and accounts of property damage were most severe in Makuyuni and Naitolia. The vast majority of respondents (96 %) did not have a household member who had been injured by elephants over the preceding twelve-month period, suggesting that elephant attacks on humans were relatively infrequent on the whole. However, between 10 and 24 % of participants in Lemooti, Nafco, Mswakini, and Mswakini Juu noted injuries incurred in the past year. Different ethnic groups had statistically significant differences in their attitudes towards elephants. People with higher levels of education had more positive attitudes towards elephants, and elders had more negative attitudes than youth. Elephants disturbed the sleep of men more than women highlighting the gendered dimensions of human-wildlife interactions. Despite these visible and hidden costs of elephants, most people (72 %) across the whole study area were somewhat tolerant of elephants, except in Makuyuni, Lengoolwa, and Nafco where seasonal crop raiding was severe and tolerance for elephants was extremely low. People in those villages, as well as Mswakini Juu and Mswakini, were largely in favor of government-sanctioned culling, though 94 % of all respondents viewed elephant poaching as bad. Tolerance towards elephants was negatively correlated with livestock holdings and positively associated with total farm size. Greater attention to community perspectives is necessary for promoting human-elephant coexistence in the Tarangire ecosystem. Introduction

  Show more
• Loading...

  Item type:Item,

  Perceived costs as drivers of wildlife management preferences in rural Tanzanian communities

  (Wiley, 2026) Kiffner, Christian; Raycraft, Justin; Becchina, Reilly; Bettermann, Danielle; Koester, Stephen; Kriegel, Elana; Lindsay, Kiana; Ole, Edwin Maingo; Ramirez, Emily; Spizuco, Bryan; Carter, Neil H.

  Show more

  Effectively managing human–wildlife interactions is crucial for fostering coexistence on shared landscapes. Management options are most effective when aligned with the preferences of people directly affected by wildlife, yet little is known about how socioecological factors influence these preferences. Integrating responses from 680 rural residents of northern Tanzania and remotely sensed data, we parameterized a Bayesian hierarchical model to test predictions of the hazard-acceptance model. We estimated how perceived costs and benefits, distance to protected areas, and the human footprint index mediate preferences for managing (preventing damage, compensating damage, reducing populations, and doing nothing) interactions with herbivore (elephant, giraffe, buffalo, zebra, wildebeest, and impala) and carnivore (lion, hyena, leopard, cheetah, honey badger, and jackal) species. Most respondents preferred management options that supported coexistence: prevention (41.9%), no management (38.0%), and compensation (11.1%). In contrast, population reduction (9.0%) was least preferred but more frequently selected for carnivores (13.4%) than herbivores (5.3%). Perceived costs strongly influenced management preferences. Respondents perceiving tangible costs were more likely to prefer prevention (posterior mean: 0.57 [95% credible interval 0.00 to 0.99]) over compensation (0.07 [0.00 to 0.66]) or population reduction (0.16 [0.00 to 0.87]), whereas those not perceiving costs leaned toward no management (0.40 [−0.74 to 1.78]). Though perceived benefits were less influential than costs, respondents associating species with intangible (0.10 [0.00 to 0.74]) or tourism benefits (0.06 [0.00 to 0.63]) were less likely to support population reduction than those perceiving no benefits (0.12 [0.00 to 0.82]). Distance to protected areas and the human footprint index had weaker, inconsistent effects, but random intercepts indicated substantial village–village variation in preferred management options. Our results suggest that conservation strategies should primarily address wildlife-related costs and foster coexistence by more equitably distributing benefits. A possible strategy could include investing tourism revenues into comanaged, locally tailored damage prevention measures.

  Show more
• Loading...

  Item type:Item,

  Comments on Sundstrom’s Just Shelter

  (University of Groningen Press, 2025) Olasov, Ian

  Show more