Coexistence for Whom?

Pooley, Simon

doi:10.3389/fcosc.2021.726991

Cited by 37 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We seek to understand coexistence dynamically and holistically, including positive aspects of human-wildlife relationships, alongside the more widely publicized negative interactions such as crop damage, livestock depredations, attacks on humans, and retaliatory killing (Pooley, 2021). We therefore accept coexistence as "a state where conflict exists but where interactions are kept within acceptable limits" (Linnell, 2013, p. 26).…”

Section: What Do We Mean By Coexistence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Approaches that build on such deep cultural relationships with large carnivores can play fundamental roles in promoting the value of carnivores as a social as well as a natural resource (Nijhawan and Mihu, 2020). These examples contribute to an understanding of coexistence as complex, multi-layered and deeply rooted in culture, and demonstrate the importance of viewing coexistence through different perspectives and cultural lenses (Adams and Mulligan, 2003;Peterson et al, 2010;Pooley, 2021).…”

Section: What Do We Mean By Coexistence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fostering Coexistence Between People and Large Carnivores in Africa: Using a Theory of Change to Identify Pathways to Impact and Their Underlying Assumptions

Durant

Marino

Linnell

et al. 2022

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coexistence with large carnivores poses challenges to human well-being, livelihoods, development, resource management, and policy. Even where people and carnivores have historically coexisted, traditional patterns of behavior toward large carnivores may be disrupted by wider processes of economic, social, political, and climate change. Conservation interventions have typically focused on changing behaviors of those living alongside large carnivores to promote sustainable practices. While these interventions remain important, their success is inextricably linked to broader socio-political contexts, including natural resource governance and equitable distribution of conservation-linked costs and benefits. In this context we propose a Theory of Change to identify logical pathways of action through which coexistence with large carnivores can be enhanced. We focus on Africa's dryland landscapes, known for their diverse guild of large carnivores that remain relatively widespread across the continent. We review the literature to understand coexistence and its challenges; explain our Theory of Change, including expected outcomes and pathways to impact; and discuss how our model could be implemented and operationalized. Our analysis draws on the experience of coauthors, who are scientists and practitioners, and on literature from conservation, political ecology, and anthropology to explore the challenges, local realities, and place-based conditions under which expected outcomes succeed or fail. Three pathways to impact were identified: (a) putting in place good governance harmonized across geographic scales; (b) addressing coexistence at the landscape level; and (c) reducing costs and increasing benefits of sharing a landscape with large carnivores. Coordinated conservation across the extensive, and potentially transboundary, landscapes needed by large carnivores requires harmonization of top-down approaches with bottom-up community-based conservation. We propose adaptive co-management approaches combined with processes for active community engagement and informed consent as useful dynamic mechanisms for navigating through this contested space, while enabling adaptation to climate change. Success depends on strengthening underlying enabling conditions, including governance, capacity, local empowerment, effective monitoring, and sustainable financial support. Implementing the Theory of Change requires ongoing monitoring and evaluation to inform adaptation and build confidence in the model. Overall, the model provides a flexible and practical framework that can be adapted to dynamic local socio-ecological contexts.

show abstract

Section: What Do We Mean By Coexistence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Do We Mean By Coexistence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fostering Coexistence Between People and Large Carnivores in Africa: Using a Theory of Change to Identify Pathways to Impact and Their Underlying Assumptions

Durant

Marino

Linnell

et al. 2022

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All the difficulties named as key to achieve success in the reintroduction projects are hard to solve without changing paradigms. To restore biodiversity, it is essential to seek new ways of thinking and doing conservation, adding the coexistence perspective, where interactions between people and wildlife are managed to keep wild species population sharing space and resources with human communities in a socially fair way (Pascual et al, 2021;Pooley, 2021;Pooley et al, 2021).…”

Section: Actions Using a Human Dimensions Approach And The Lack Of Detailmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Dimensions of the Reintroduction of Brazilian Birds

Martins

Engel

Schulz

et al. 2022

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People's acceptability for wildlife, stakeholders' engagement and involvement are acknowledged as key factors for the success of wildlife reintroduction projects. We analyzed the main National Action Plans (NAPs) (the Brazilian management participatory instrument for the conservation of endangered species) for eight bird species and conducted an online questionnaire with researchers and practitioners involved in those species reintroduction programs. The assessment of the main Brazilian bird's reintroduction programs showed that, in general, efforts have been made to integrate local people into it. Nevertheless, the actions were disconnected, isolated and fragmented. A formal protocol, designed, discussed and approved by experts aiming to address the human dimensions (HD) of human-bird interactions (HBI), preferably to be used in each stage of the reintroduction programs, was not found. Actions considered related to human dimensions are mainly under the umbrella of environmental education interventions or campaigns, more directed to children and youth; correspond to activities performed by locals with the birds and/or captive birds facilities; or, fostering artcraft production or bird watching activities. The weak or sometimes absent human dimensions approach to this important conservation tool may indicate either the novelty for Brazilian researchers and managers of the science of human dimensions within the field of wildlife management or the lack of dialogue between natural and social sciences when wildlife conservation is at stake. Reintroductions are expensive, sensitive, and labor-intensive processes. It becomes necessary due the conservation status of the species and its implementation follows a careful research of biological, ecological and socio-institutional regional background that identifies the drivers of species extinction and plans according to it. Understanding and predicting people's behaviors and its triggers are paramount to successful reintroduction projects. Thus, making use of well-planned HD studies in HBI may be the watershed between success or failure of reintroduction programs. This study was a pioneer initiative of its kind and it aimed to provide sound recommendations for managers, researchers and practitioners to acknowledge the relevance of HD and its core role in the reintroduction of endangered bird species.

show abstract

“…As HEC is actually a conflict between people about the management of elephants and the use resources, the political economy and social dimensions need to be taken more into the focus of HEC analysis and management to move towards coexistence between elephants and people [42,43]. The great challenge conservation institutions face when targeting HEC management is the high complexity and dynamics within the socio-ecologic systems involved [44][45][46][47]. This complexity calls for a transdisciplinary approach, which may exceed single institutions' capacities [48][49][50].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The scientific debate around HEC/HWC and coexistence has shown that these powerful terms may have varying definitions and evoke various reactions and emotions [45,65]. Whether we define the journey from conflict to coexistence as a continuum [66] or recognize lack of clear delineation [54] or the need to introduce a new term and concept [67], the call to change the state of conflict to something more beneficial and more equitable for those living with it is generally supported in theory [56,68].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Routes to Coexistence: Developing and Testing a Human–Elephant Conflict-Management Framework for African Elephant-Range Countries

Groß¹,

Pereira

Shaba³

et al. 2022

Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creating a future for elephants and people is a highly complex and dynamic challenge, involving social, behavioral, and ecological dimensions as well as multiple actors with various interests. To foster learning from human–elephant conflict (HEC) management projects and share best practices, a study was conducted to review the management of conflicts between elephants and humans in 12 African countries by qualitative expert interviews. Based on this information, a HEC management framework was developed in a two-tiered process. In the first phase, the theory of the framework was developed. In a second phase, the theoretical framework was validated and adjusted through stakeholder participation in two southern African projects (in Mozambique and Malawi). This holistic approach considers environmental as well as social, political, cultural, and economic factors directly or indirectly affecting interactions between people and wildlife. The framework integrates six interlinked strategies to guide managers and conservation practitioners to address HWC drivers and mitigate their impact. A legal environment and spatial planning form the basis of the framework. Social strategies, including meaningful stakeholder engagement and design of appropriate institutional structures and processes are considered the heart of the framework. Technical and financial strategies represent its arms and hands. At the top, monitoring steers all processes, provides feedback for adjustment, and informs decisions. The integration and coordination of these six strategies has great potential as a guiding route to human–wildlife coexistence in Africa and elsewhere.

show abstract

Coexistence for Whom?

Cited by 37 publications

References 62 publications

Fostering Coexistence Between People and Large Carnivores in Africa: Using a Theory of Change to Identify Pathways to Impact and Their Underlying Assumptions

Fostering Coexistence Between People and Large Carnivores in Africa: Using a Theory of Change to Identify Pathways to Impact and Their Underlying Assumptions

Human Dimensions of the Reintroduction of Brazilian Birds

Exploring Routes to Coexistence: Developing and Testing a Human–Elephant Conflict-Management Framework for African Elephant-Range Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About