A groundbreaking international study led by Colorado State University has unveiled deep-rooted cultural disparities in wildlife values across Europe and the Americas, shedding new light on how historical colonization continues to shape modern perceptions and treatments of wild animals. This extensive research reveals that Latin America and North America hold fundamentally divergent worldviews regarding wildlife — a divergence entrenched in centuries-old European institutional legacies.
The researchers categorized these wildlife values into two primary orientations: mutualism and domination. Mutualism embodies the perspective that wildlife is an integral part of social communities, deserving rights and ethical consideration similar to humans. In stark contrast, domination regards wildlife principally as resources subject to human use and control. This confluence of cultural attitudes was assessed through an expansive survey involving nearly 18,500 participants across 33 countries, spanning European and American continents from 2021 to 2023.
Intriguingly, the study found that Latin America exhibits notably high levels of mutualistic wildlife values, surpassing even those of Spain and Portugal, the Iberian nations that colonized the region. This contrasts sharply with the dominantly domination-oriented views prevalent in the United States and Canada, reflecting the British colonial heritage that heavily influenced North American institutions. The differences in colonial governance and societal structures between the Iberian and British empires appear to have forged enduring wildlife value systems that persist to this day.
The legacy of colonization is further illuminated by examining Europe’s own north-south divide. Notably, northern European countries such as Britain manifest stronger domination tendencies, while southern Europe trends toward mutualism. This dichotomy correlates with religious orientations: Protestant northern Europe historically promoted human dominion over nature, whereas the Catholic-influenced south tended toward more harmonious and mutualistic relationships with wildlife.
Michael Manfredo, a professor at Colorado State University and the study’s lead author, emphasizes the historical depth of these values, tracing them to religious and cultural shifts in the 16th and 17th centuries. The Protestant doctrine encouraged mastery over the environment, a philosophy that influenced colonial policies and practices in North America profoundly. Conversely, the Catholic traditions of southern Europe supported coexistence and respect toward nonhuman life, shaping Latin American attitudes more reciprocally.
An essential dimension of the research uncovers the influence of Indigenous populations on wildlife values in Latin America. At the time of colonization, Latin America housed millions of Indigenous peoples whose cultural perspectives generally aligned with mutualistic values, viewing wildlife as part of broader social networks. The acculturation process likely resulted in the melding of Indigenous mutualism with Iberian values, fostering a unique synergy that distinguished Latin American wildlife perceptions from North American dominion-based approaches.
Beyond historical and cultural insights, this study holds profound implications for contemporary wildlife management policies in an increasingly interconnected world. Cross-cultural conservation efforts often encounter conflicts stemming from these divergent values. Practices such as lethal control of wildlife, common in North America under domination frameworks, are far less accepted in Latin America, where lethal measures are reserved only for extreme scenarios posing significant threats to human safety.
The research underscores the necessity of tailoring conservation policies to align with the prevailing cultural values of a region. Ignoring such deep-seated differences risks alienating local populations and undermining the efficacy of wildlife management programs. As anonymity in public opinion shifts over time, ongoing monitoring of societal attitudes toward wildlife remains crucial for policy adaptation and success.
Importantly, the study challenges the assumption that wildlife values can be rapidly transformed through policy or education alone. These views are deeply interwoven with historical institutions, religion, and social customs, evolving gradually over generations. However, gradual cultural shifts are possible, as evidenced by emerging animal rights movements that incrementally foster mutualistic attitudes in traditionally domination-oriented societies.
Tara Teel, co-author and CSU professor, highlights the importance of pragmatic conservation strategies that work within existing cultural frameworks rather than attempting to reshape values wholesale. Recognizing and respecting these enduring legacies enable collaboration that is both ethically sound and practically effective for global biodiversity conservation.
The findings presented in this seminal study not only bridge the disciplines of natural resource management, cultural anthropology, and political ecology, but also provide a robust framework for understanding and navigating the complex human dimensions of wildlife conservation. Such interdisciplinary approaches are imperative as the world confronts escalating challenges involving human-wildlife conflicts, habitat loss, and species conservation.
Ultimately, this investigation demonstrates that wildlife values are more than abstract concepts—they constitute living legacies shaped by centuries of history, colonization, and cultural evolution. To sustain biodiversity effectively, conservationists and policymakers must integrate this nuanced understanding, fostering strategies that resonate with the diverse cultural landscapes spanning the Americas and Europe.
Subject of Research: Enduring cultural legacies influencing wildlife values across Europe and the Americas.
Article Title: Enduring cultural legacies affect Euro-American wildlife values
News Publication Date: 15-May-2026
Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41893-026-01825-8
Image Credits: Colorado State University/Manfredo et al.
Keywords: Wildlife, Wildlife management, Europe, North America, South America, Cultural diversity, Cultural practices, Conservation policies, Conservation priorities, Religion, Catholicism, Animal rights, Mutualism, Indigenous peoples, Public policy, Public opinion
