Who suffers the most? Wild boars, perceived harm, and local politics: Governance challenges in urban human-wildlife conflicts

Do wild animals play a role in political dynamics? As urbanization progresses, interactions between humans and wild animals in cities are becoming more frequent, shaping public perceptions, local politics, and urban governance. These encounters can generate tensions, influencing residents' sense of harm, political attitudes, and policy debates. The existing research about these issues is deeply rooted in the fields of ecology and wildlife management, biology and medicine, conservation, sociology, geography, and law. However, empirical research on the personal and political factors that affect the encounters between people and wild animals in cities and the political consequences of such encounters is rare. Therefore, we conducted an empirical longitudinal study using the presence of wild boars in Haifa, Israel. We explored the dynamics between wild animals, humans, the municipality, local politics, and public opinion. In particular, we investigated the personal, cultural, environmental, and political factors that affect the extent to which Haifa's residents felt harmed by the presence of wild animals in the city. Our findings about the personal, cultural, environmental, and political price of encounters with wild boars in urban area adds to current theory in the fields of local government, governance, and politics, as well as urbanism, crisis management, and human interactions with nature. The findings show that some residents perceive wild boars as harmful, highlighting the complex ways in which human-wildlife interactions intersect with urban governance and political attitudes. Recognizing these interconnections may help policymakers, politicians, and civil society activists better understand the challenges of managing urban wildlife conflicts in ways that reflect diverse public concerns and governance considerations.