Responsibility, equity, justice, and inclusion in dynamic human–wildlife interactions

Abstract

In an era of rapid environmental change, human–wildlife interactions (HWIs) are increasingly complex and pervasive across ecosystems. Negative outcomes from such interactions continue to warrant much attention, given their implications for conservation and human livelihoods. However, framing HWIs solely along a coexistence–conflict continuum is overly simplistic because coexistence is not devoid of conflict and negates the temporal dynamics of potential outcomes. Furthermore, without thorough consideration of governing principles, HWIs will persistently result in negative outcomes and a skewed perspective within the scientific community and among the public. Here we argue that incorporating the principles of responsibility, equity, justice, and inclusion (REJI) into conservation‐oriented activities can influence the intensity, severity, and duration of negative outcomes throughout the HWI life cycle. The conceptual framework we present both complements and expands assessment and anticipation of HWI outcomes, which are inherently contingent on scientific practice, cultural sensitivity, and interdisciplinary approaches.

What's going to be on the menu with global environmental changes?

“…Human–wildlife conflicts may become amplified as both compete over limited resources in shared landscapes with ineffective mitigation strategies (Abrahms et al, 2023; Harris et al, 2023) (Box 2). In Kenya, livestock depredation events were highest when natural prey density was lowest during the wet season (Mukeka et al, 2019).…”

“…Human-wildlife conflicts may become amplified as both compete over limited resources in shared landscapes with ineffective mitigation strategies (Abrahms et al, 2023;Harris et al, 2023)…”

Mapping social conflicts to enhance the integrated management of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)

“…With increasing human populations, deteriorating habitats, globalization, and climate change, human‐wildlife interactions are becoming increasingly complex (Abrahms et al, 2023; Dietsch et al, 2016; Harris et al, 2023; Manfredo et al, 2020; Stinchcomb et al, 2022a). Research has shown that human‐wildlife interactions are shaped by various social factors and that human‐wildlife conflicts “are often manifestations of underlying human‐human conflicts” (Dickman, 2010, p. 458).…”

“…Wildlife agencies and organizations across the globe, including in North America, are striving to incorporate more diverse social values and perspectives into management planning (AFWA & WMI, 2019; Hodgson et al, 2020; König et al, 2021). Scholars have proposed the integration of responsibility, equity, justice, and inclusion as governing principles for human‐wildlife interactions (Harris et al, 2023). Specifically, addressing the needs of all possible ‘beneficiaries’ of wildlife remains an important aspect of good wildlife governance (Decker et al, 2016; Hare et al, 2017).…”

Crop losses and patterns of wildlife damage at the periphery of Dassioko Classified Forest and Forêt des Marais Tanoé-Ehy in Côte d’Ivoire

“…Animals attack crops, undoubtedly led by a preference for different parts of these plants, caused by the way crop losses. Given the recurrence of such losses at the periphery of various forests in Ivory Coast, our study has thus chosen to characterize patterns of crop raiding at the periphery of DCF and FMTE for a better understanding of why certain scientists reveal that wildlife losses cause crops are sometimes dramatic (FAO, 2010;Braczkowski et al, 2023;Nyeema et al, 2023). The specific objectives were to determine animal species involved by crops and their preference and evaluate the extent of losses caused by wildlife.…”