Killing animals for recreation?: A quantitative study of hunters’ motives and their perceived moral relevance

Christian Gamborg; Frank Søndergaard Jensen; Peter Sandøe

doi:10.1080/08941920.2017.1377332

Killing animals for recreation? A quantitative study of hunters’ motives and their perceived moral relevance

Christian Gamborg, Frank Søndergaard Jensen, Peter Sandøe

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Hunters in the Western world today do not need to hunt to obtain food and other animal products. So why do they hunt? This paper examines the motives of hunters, the motives ascribed to hunters by members of the general public, and the role motives play for the moral acceptability of hunting among members of the general public. It draws on a nationally representative survey of the general public (n = 1,001) and hunters (n = 1,130) in Denmark. People with a negative attitude to hunting are more likely to take motives into account when they consider the acceptability of hunting. Three clusters of motives defining distinctive hunting motivational orientations were identified: action/harvest, management/care, and natural and social encounters. The general public ascribed action/harvest motives to hunters more than hunters did. In a policy perspective, if hunters’ motives are misperceived, improved dialog may be needed to protect the legitimacy of recreational hunting.

Original language	English
Journal	Society and Natural Resources
Volume	31
Issue number	4
Pages (from-to)	489-502
Number of pages	14
ISSN	0894-1920
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1377332
Publication status	Published - 3 Apr 2018

Access to Document

10.1080/08941920.2017.1377332

Cite this

@article{5b649481b4ad48cf8e3a9eae678bfc9a,

title = "Killing animals for recreation?: A quantitative study of hunters{\textquoteright} motives and their perceived moral relevance",

abstract = "Hunters in the Western world today do not need to hunt to obtain food and other animal products. So why do they hunt? This paper examines the motives of hunters, the motives ascribed to hunters by members of the general public, and the role motives play for the moral acceptability of hunting among members of the general public. It draws on a nationally representative survey of the general public (n = 1,001) and hunters (n = 1,130) in Denmark. People with a negative attitude to hunting are more likely to take motives into account when they consider the acceptability of hunting. Three clusters of motives defining distinctive hunting motivational orientations were identified: action/harvest, management/care, and natural and social encounters. The general public ascribed action/harvest motives to hunters more than hunters did. In a policy perspective, if hunters{\textquoteright} motives are misperceived, improved dialog may be needed to protect the legitimacy of recreational hunting.",

author = "Christian Gamborg and Jensen, {Frank S{\o}ndergaard} and Peter Sand{\o}e",

year = "2018",

month = apr,

day = "3",

doi = "10.1080/08941920.2017.1377332",

language = "English",

volume = "31",

pages = "489--502",

journal = "Society and Natural Resources",

issn = "0894-1920",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Killing animals for recreation?

T2 - A quantitative study of hunters’ motives and their perceived moral relevance

AU - Gamborg, Christian

AU - Jensen, Frank Søndergaard

AU - Sandøe, Peter

PY - 2018/4/3

Y1 - 2018/4/3

N2 - Hunters in the Western world today do not need to hunt to obtain food and other animal products. So why do they hunt? This paper examines the motives of hunters, the motives ascribed to hunters by members of the general public, and the role motives play for the moral acceptability of hunting among members of the general public. It draws on a nationally representative survey of the general public (n = 1,001) and hunters (n = 1,130) in Denmark. People with a negative attitude to hunting are more likely to take motives into account when they consider the acceptability of hunting. Three clusters of motives defining distinctive hunting motivational orientations were identified: action/harvest, management/care, and natural and social encounters. The general public ascribed action/harvest motives to hunters more than hunters did. In a policy perspective, if hunters’ motives are misperceived, improved dialog may be needed to protect the legitimacy of recreational hunting.

AB - Hunters in the Western world today do not need to hunt to obtain food and other animal products. So why do they hunt? This paper examines the motives of hunters, the motives ascribed to hunters by members of the general public, and the role motives play for the moral acceptability of hunting among members of the general public. It draws on a nationally representative survey of the general public (n = 1,001) and hunters (n = 1,130) in Denmark. People with a negative attitude to hunting are more likely to take motives into account when they consider the acceptability of hunting. Three clusters of motives defining distinctive hunting motivational orientations were identified: action/harvest, management/care, and natural and social encounters. The general public ascribed action/harvest motives to hunters more than hunters did. In a policy perspective, if hunters’ motives are misperceived, improved dialog may be needed to protect the legitimacy of recreational hunting.

U2 - 10.1080/08941920.2017.1377332

DO - 10.1080/08941920.2017.1377332

M3 - Journal article

SN - 0894-1920

VL - 31

SP - 489

EP - 502

JO - Society and Natural Resources

JF - Society and Natural Resources

IS - 4

ER -

Killing animals for recreation? A quantitative study of hunters’ motives and their perceived moral relevance

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this