Planning for Human-Wildlife Coexistence: Conceptual Framework, Workshop Process, and a Model for Transdisciplinary Collaboration

Abstract

Coexistence, as a concept and as a management goal and practice, has attracted increasing attention from researchers, managers and decision-makers dedicated to understanding and improving human-wildlife interactions. Although it still lacks a universally agreed definition, coexistence has increasingly been associated with a broad spectrum of human-wildlife interactions, including positive interactions, transcending a conservation focus on endangered wildlife, and involving explicitly considerations of power, equity and justice. In a growingly complex and interconnected human-dominated world, the key to turning human-wildlife interactions into large-scale coexistence is thorough planning. We present an approach for evidence-based, structured, and participatory decision-making in planning for human-wildlife coexistence. More specifically, we propose (i) a conceptual framework for describing the situation and setting the goals, (ii) a process for examining the causes of the situation and creating a theory of change, and (iii) a model for transdisciplinary research and collaboration integrating researchers, decision-makers and residents along with the interests of wildlife. To illustrate the approach, we report on the workshop considering the Jaguars of Iguaçu, a conservation project whose strategy includes the improvement of the relationship between ranchers and jaguars outside Iguaçu National Park, Brazil.

Conservation conflict hotspots: Mapping impacts, risk perception and tolerance for sustainable conservation management

“…First, we propose to increase the trend toward more social scientists, community commissioners, and dedicated staff in conservation organizations. Interdisciplinarity and participatory interdisciplinarity (O'Brien et al, 2013) can enable ecologists and conservation biologists to collaborate with social scientists as well as local managers and authorities to share and combine different datasets (see also Marchini et al, 2021). Second, data collection can be integrated into a process to promote common ground consolidation (Lecuyer et al, 2018a) or dialogic decisionmaking.…”

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

“…To fully understand the conflict drivers, their impacts, and interconnectivity, holistic views involving multiple factors (e.g., ecologic, social, cultural economic factors) need to be employed [40,[51][52][53]. Adding to this, HWC does not only touch upon conservation concerns, but also social and development issues and thus calls for transdisciplinary analysis and cross-sectoral integration of planning and action (e.g., development, health, conservation, security, waste management) [11,[54][55][56].…”

“…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].…”

“…An integrated approach to managing HWC was introduced by WWF, called the Safe systems approach [33,73], highlighting the need to integrate various management measures to de-couple the damage and threat from a rise in wildlife populations. Additionally, Marchini et al [54] developed a conceptual framework to guide conservation projects to set clear goals and take actions based on evidence and structured, participatory decision making. Furthermore, the Human-Wildlife Conflict and Coexistence Specialist Group of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published position statements and briefing papers in preparation of guidelines that emphasizes the uniqueness of every HWC case due to varying ecological, social, and economic factors and acknowledges the need to carefully design processes and foster capacity building and learning exchange [39].…”

Coexistência com a fauna no Campus USP “Luiz de Queiroz”

“…FIGURA 1Diagrama de Interações Humano-Fauna: os dois eixos, que informam o impacto da interação sobre a fauna e sobre as pessoas, de negativo (vermelho) a positivo (azul), definem as quatro classes fundamentais de interação (adaptado deMarchini et al 2021). …”