EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 26 / No 3 (July-September 2018) Nat. Sci. Soc., 26 3 (2018) 280-290 References
Open Access
Issue
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 26, Number 3, July-September 2018
Page(s) 280 - 290
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2018051
Published online 07 December 2018
  • Baldaccini N.E., Giunchi D., Mongini E., Ragionieri L., 2000. Foraging flights of wild rock doves (Columba l. livia): a spatio-temporal analysis, Italian Journal of Zoology, 67, 4, 371-377. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bixler R.D., Floyd M.F., 1997. Nature is scary, disgusting, and uncomfortable, Environment and Behavior, 29, 4, 443-467. [Google Scholar]
  • Bradshaw G.A., Borchers J.G., 2000. Uncertainty as information. Narrowing the science-policy gap, Ecology and Society, 4, 1, 7. [Google Scholar]
  • Buijs J.A., Van Wijnen J.H., 2001. Survey of feral rock doves (Columba livia) in Amsterdam, a bird-human association, Urban Ecosystems, 5, 4, 235-241. [Google Scholar]
  • Buijs A.E., Elands B.H.M., 2013. Does expertise matter? An in-depth understanding of people’s structure of thoughts on nature and its management implications, Biological Conservation, 168, 184-191. [Google Scholar]
  • Caswell H., 1989. Matrix population models. Construction, analysis and interpretation, Sunderland (MA), Sinauer Associates. [Google Scholar]
  • Claeys C., Sirost O., 2010. Proliférantes natures. Introduction, Études rurales, 185, 9-22. [Google Scholar]
  • Colon P.-L., Lequarré N., 2013. Le nourrissage des pigeons dans la région parisienne, Ethnologie française, 43, 1, 155-162. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Corral S., Acosta M., 2017. Social sensitivity analysis in conflictive environmental governance: a case of forest planning, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, 54-62. [Google Scholar]
  • Dehay C., 2008. Fidélité des pigeons (Columba livia) à un pigeonnier urbain. Mémoire de diplôme EPHE des sciences et vie de la Terre, Paris, École pratique des hautes études. [Google Scholar]
  • Dunn R.R., Gavin M.C., Sanchez M.C., Solomon J.N., 2006. The pigeon paradox: dependence of global conservation on urban nature, Conservation Biology, 20, 6, 1814-1816. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fall M.W., Jackson W.B., 2002. The tools and techniques of wildlife damage management – changing needs: an introduction, International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 49, 2-3, 87-91. [Google Scholar]
  • Flynn L.R., Goldsmith E., 1994. Opinion leadership in green consumption: an explanatory study, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 3, 543-553. [Google Scholar]
  • Frantz A., Pottier M.-A., Karimi B., Corbel H., Aubry E., Haussy C., Gasparini J., Castrec-Rouelle M., 2012. Contrasting levels of heavy metals in the feathers of urban pigeons from close habitats suggest limited movements at a restricted scale, Environmental Pollution, 168, 23-28. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fritsche I., Jonas E., Niesta Kayser D., Koranyi N., 2010. Existential threat and compliance with pro-environmental norms, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 1, 67-79. [Google Scholar]
  • Gasparini J., Erin N., Bertin C., Jacquin L., Vorimore F., Frantz A., Lenouvel P., Laroucau K., 2011. Impact of urban environment and host phenotype on the epidemiology of Chlamydiaceae in feral pigeons (Columba livia), Environmental Microbiology, 13, 12, 3186-3193. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Giunchi D., Albores-Barajas Y.V., Baldaccini N.E., Vanni L., Soldatini C., 2012. Feral pigeons: problems, dynamics and control methods, in Soloneski S., Larramendy M.L. (Eds), Integrated pest management and pest control. Current and future tactics, London, InTechOpen, 215-240, www.intechopen.com/books/integrated-pest-management-and-pest-control-current-and-future-tactics/feral-pigeons-problems-dynamics-and-control-methods. [Google Scholar]
  • Gobster P.H., 2005. Invasive species as ecological threat: is restoration an alternative to fear-based resource management?, Ecological Restoration, 23, 4, 261-270. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gobster P.H., Nassauer J.I., Daniel T.C., Fry G., 2007. The shared landscape: what does aesthetics have to do with ecology?, Landscape Ecology, 22, 7, 959-972. [Google Scholar]
  • Gouabault E., Burton-Jeangros C., 2010. L’ambivalence des relations humain-animal. Une analyse socio-anthropologique du monde contemporain, Sociologie et Sociétés, 42, 1, 299-324. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Griffiths I.H., Poulter D.S., 2000. Feral cats in the city, in Philo C., Wilbert C. (Eds), Animal spaces, beastly places: new geographies of human-animal relations, London/New York, Routledge, 59-72. [Google Scholar]
  • Haag-Wackernagel D., 1995. Regulation of the street pigeon in Basel, Wildlife Society Bulletin, 23, 2, 256-260. [Google Scholar]
  • Haag-Wackernagel D., 1997. Sociocultural reasons for the pigeon problem, Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift, 104, 2, 52-57. [Google Scholar]
  • Haag-Wackernagel D., 2000. Behavioural responses of the feral pigeon (Columbidae) to deterring systems, Folia Zoologica, 49, 2, 25-39. [Google Scholar]
  • Haag-Wackernagel D., 2002. Feral pigeons: management experiences in Europe, in Dinetti M. (Ed.), Specie ornitiche problematiche: biologia e gestiona nelle città e nel territorio, Atti del secondo convegno nazionale sulla fauna urbana, 10 Giugno 2000, Firenze, 25-37. [Google Scholar]
  • Haag-Wackernagel D., Moch H., 2004. Health hazards posed by feral pigeons, Journal of Infection, 48, 4, 307-313. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hastings G., Stead M., Webb J., 2004. Fear appeals in social marketing: strategic and ethical reasons for concern, Psychology and Marketing, 21, 11, 961-986. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hetmański T., 2007. Dispersion asymmetry within a feral pigeon Columba livia population, Acta Ornithologica, 42, 1, 23-31. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hetmański T., Bocheński M., Tryjanowski P., Skorka P., 2011. The effect of habitat and number of inhabitants on the population sizes of feral pigeons around towns in Northern Poland, European Journal of Wildlife Research, 57, 3, 421-428. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hoyo J. del, Elliott A., Christie D. (Eds), 2005. Handbook of the birds of the world. Volume 10, Cuckoo-shrikes to thrushes, Barcelona, Lynx Edicions. [Google Scholar]
  • Jacob G., Prévot-Julliard A.-C., Baudry E., 2014. The geographic scale of genetic differentiation in the feral pigeon (Columba livia): implications for management, Biological Invasions, 17, 1, 23-29, doi: 10.1007/s10530-014-0713-2. [Google Scholar]
  • Jacquin L., Cazelles B., Prévot-Julliard A.-C., Leboucher G., Gasparini J., 2010. Reproduction management affects breeding ecology and reproduction costs in feral urban pigeons (Columba livia), Canadian Journal of Zoology, 88, 8, 781-787. [Google Scholar]
  • Jacquin L., Récapet C., Prévot-Julliard A.-C., Leboucher G., Lenouvel P., Erin N., Corbel H., Frantz A., Gasparini J., 2013. A potential role for parasites in the maintenance of color polymorphism in urban birds, Oecologia, 173, 3, 1089-1099. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jerolmack C., 2008. How pigeons became rats: the cultural-spatial logic of problem animals, Social Problems, 55, 1, 72-94. [Google Scholar]
  • Jerolmack C., 2013. The global pigeon, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Johnston R.F., Janiga M., 1995. Feral pigeons, New York, Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Jokimäki J., Suhonen J., 1998. Distribution and habitat selection of wintering birds in urban environments, Landscape and Urban Planning, 39, 4, 253-263. [Google Scholar]
  • Koger S.M., Winter D.D., 2010. The psychology of environmental problems: psychology for sustainability, New York, Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Kalof L., Amthor R.F., 2010. Cultural representations of problem animals in National Geographic, Études Rurales, 185, 1, 165-180. [Google Scholar]
  • Latour B., 1993. We have never been modern, Cambridge (MA), Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Lefebvre L., Giraldeau L.-A., 1984. Daily feeding site use of urban pigeons, Canadian Journal of Zoology, 62, 7, 1425-1428. [Google Scholar]
  • Light A., 2000. Restoration, the value of participation, and the risks of professionalization, in Gobster P.H., Hull B. (Eds), Restoring nature: perspectives from the social sciences and humanities, Washington (D.C.), Island Press, 163-181. [Google Scholar]
  • Lizet B., Millet J., 2012. Le pigeonnier public, à la croisée des utopies sur le vivant dans la ville, in Lizet B., Millet J. (Eds), Animal certifié conforme. Déchiffrer nos relations avec le vivant, Paris, Dunod/Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, 185-204. [Google Scholar]
  • Louv R., 2008. Last child in the woods. Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder, Chapel Hill, Algonquin Books of Chapell Hill. [Google Scholar]
  • Magnino S., Haag-Wackernagel D., Geigenfeind I., Helmecke S., Dovc A., Prukner-Radovcic E., Residbegovic E., Ilieski V., Laroucau K., Donati M., Martinov S., Kaleta E.F., 2009. Chlamydial infections in feral pigeons in Europe: review of data and focus on public health implications, Veterinary Microbiology, 135, 1-2, 54-67. [Google Scholar]
  • Maris V., Béchet A., 2010. From adaptive management to adjustive management: a pragmatic account of biodiversity values, Conservation Biology, 24, 4, 966-973. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mathieu N., Rivault C., Blanc N., Cloarec A., 1997. Le dialogue interdisciplinaire mis à l’épreuve : réflexions à partir d’une recherche sur les blattes urbaines, Nature Sciences Sociétés, 5, 1, 18-30. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • McKinney M.L., 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. The impacts of urbanization on native species are poorly studied, but educating a highly urbanized human population about these impacts can greatly improve species conservation in all ecosystems, BioScience, 52, 10, 883-890. [Google Scholar]
  • Miller J.R., 2005. Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 20, 8, 430-434. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Minteer B.A., Collins J.P., 2005. Why we need an “ecological ethics”, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 3, 6, 332-337. [Google Scholar]
  • Møller A.P., 2008. Flight distance of urban birds, predation, and selection for urban life, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 63, 1, 63-75. [Google Scholar]
  • Moscovici S., 2000. Social representations. Explorations in social psychology, Cambridge, Polity Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Mugerauer R., 2010. Toward a theory of integrated urban ecology: complementing Pickett et al., Ecology and Society, 15, 4, 31. [Google Scholar]
  • Nam D.H., Lee D.P., Koo T.H., 2004. Monitoring for lead pollution using feathers of feral pigeons (Columba livia) from Korea, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 95, 1-3, 13-22. [Google Scholar]
  • Ostrom E., 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems, Science, 325, 5939, 419-422. [Google Scholar]
  • Philo C., Wilbert C., 2000. Animal spaces, beastly places: an introduction, in Philo C., Wilbert C. (Eds), Animal spaces, beastly places: new geographies of human-animal relations, London/New York, Routledge, 1-34. [Google Scholar]
  • Pickett S.T.A., Cadenasso M.L., Grove J.M., Groffman P.M., Band L.E., Boone C.G., Burch W.R., Grimmond S.B., Hom J., Jenkins J.C., Law N.L., Nilon C.H., Pouyat R.V., Szlavecz K., Warren P.S., Wilson M.A., 2008. Beyond urban legends: an emerging framework of urban ecology, as illustrated by the Baltimore ecosystem study, Bioscience, 58, 2, 139-150. [Google Scholar]
  • Ragni B., Velatta F., Montefameglio M., 1996. Restrizione dell’habitat per il controllo della popolazione urbana di Columba livia, in Alleva E., Baldaccini N.E., Fortuna P., Mantovani A. (Eds), Atti del convegno “Il controllo delle popolazioni ornitiche sinantropiche (piccioni e storni): problemi e prospettive”, 10-11 ottobre 1993, Roma, Istituto superiore di sanità, 106-110. [Google Scholar]
  • Récapet C., Dauphin L., Jacquin L., Gasparini J., Prévot-Julliard A.-C., 2013. Eumelanin-based colouration reflects local survival of juvenile feral pigeons in an urban pigeon house, Journal of Avian Biology, 44, 6, 583-590. [Google Scholar]
  • Rivault C., Mathieu N., Cloarec A., Blanc N., 1993. Les blattes. Un animal de ville à toutes saisons, Les Annales de la recherche urbaine, 61, 33-39. [Google Scholar]
  • Robbins P., 2007. Lawn people. How grasses, weeds, and chemicals made us who we are, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Rose E., Nagel P., Haag-Wackernagel D., 2006. Spatio-temporal use of the urban habitat by feral pigeons (Columba livia), Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 60, 2, 242-254. [Google Scholar]
  • Rosenzweig M.L., 2003. Reconciliation ecology and the future of species diversity, Oryx, 37, 2, 194-205. [Google Scholar]
  • Sacchi R., Gentilli A., Razzetti E., Barbieri F., 2002. Effects of building features on density and flock distribution of feral pigeons Columba livia var. domestica in an urban environment, Canadian Journal of Zoology, 80, 1, 48-54. [Google Scholar]
  • Senar J.C., Carrillo J., Arroyo L., Montalvo T., Peracho V., 2009. Estima de la abundancia de palomas (Columba livia var.) de la ciudad de Barcelona y valoración de la efectividad del control por eliminación de individuos, Arxius de Miscel-lània Zoològica, 7, 62-71. [Google Scholar]
  • Serpell J.A., 2004. Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare, Animal Welfare, 13, supplementary issue, Proceedings of the UFAW International Symposium “Science in the service of animal welfare”, 145-151. [Google Scholar]
  • Skandrani Z., Lepetz S., Prévot-Julliard A.-C., 2014. Nuisance species: beyond the ecological perspective, Ecological Processes, 3, 1, 1-12. [Google Scholar]
  • Soga M., Gaston K.J., 2016. Extinction of experience: the loss of human-nature interactions, Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 14, 2, 94-101. [Google Scholar]
  • Sol D., Senar J.C., 1992. Comparison between two censuses of Feral Pigeon Columba livia var. from Barcelona: an evaluation of seven years of control by killing, Butlletí del Grup Català d’Anellament, 9, 29-32. [Google Scholar]
  • Soldatini C., Mainardi D., Baldaccini N.E., Giunchi D., 2006. A temporal analysis of the foraging flights of feral pigeons (Columba livia f. domestica) from three Italian cities, Italian Journal of Zoology, 73, 1, 83-92. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Stokes D.L., 2007. Things we like: human preferences among similar organisms and implications for conservation, Human Ecology, 35, 3, 361-369. [Google Scholar]
  • Visseren-Hamakers I.J., 2015. Integrative environmental governance: enhancing governance in the era of synergies, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 136-143. [Google Scholar]
  • Vuorisalo T., Lehikoinen E., Lahtinen R., 2001. History of domestic and feral pigeons (Columba livia) in Finland before 1900 A.D., Ornis Fennica, 78, 119-126. [Google Scholar]
  • Vuorisalo T., Andersson H., Hugg T., Lahtinen R., Laaksonen H., Lehikoinen E., 2003. Urban development from an avian perspective: causes of hooded crow (Corvus corone cornix) urbanisation in two Finnish cities, Landscape and Urban Planning, 62, 2, 69-87. [Google Scholar]
  • Whitley B.E., Kite M.E., 2006. The psychology of prejudice and discrimination, Belmont (CA), Thomson Wadsworth. [Google Scholar]
  • Williams T., 2002. America’s largest weed. Eucalyptus has its defenders, but today, 150 years after these “wonder trees” were first brought to coastal California, their dark side is coming to light, Audubon, 104, 1, 24-31.. [Google Scholar]
  • Witte K., Allen M., 2000. A meta-analysis of fear appeals: implications for effective public health campaigns, Health Education & Behavior, 27, 5, 591-615. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zucconi S., Galavotti S., Deserti R., 2003. I colombi in ambiente urbano, Disinfestazione, 9-21. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.