Bridging the gap: Why positive values are not enough for human–bear coexistence

Abstract

Amid escalating and complex human–wildlife conflicts driven by global environmental change, understanding the psychosocial drivers of human tolerance is paramount for effective coexistence strategies. This study investigated the determinants of human tolerance towards the Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus) in Gaoligong Mountains, China, a region characterized by significant human–bear conflicts. Employing 205 semi-structured interviews, we assessed wildlife value orientation, human perceptions and personal experiences, and examined their interactive effects on human tolerance using the structural equation model. We identified that a prominent mutualism orientation fostered trust in authorities, mediated by similarity with authorities, subsequently enhancing human tolerance. Crucially, despite the strong presence of pro-coexistence values, overall tolerance remained low. This contradiction stemmed from the overwhelming negative influence of domination orientation, compounded by limited benefits and heighted perceived risks. These risks were further exacerbated by direct conflict experiences, a lack of effective mitigation and awareness of species recovery. Our results underscore the multifaceted nature of human tolerance, revealing a critical dissonance between residents' high pro-coexistence sentiments and actual low tolerance. These positive values were severely strained by the tangible realities of conflict, leading to a precarious state of tolerance. Therefore, management strategies must urgently address this dissonance by prioritizing risk mitigation, enhancing benefit, and consolidating public trust. Such interventions are crucial to reinforce, rather than erode, the foundational mutualistic values essential for long-term coexistence. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.