Participatory co-learning for human-wildlife coexistence: Reflections on a novel program applying systems thinking, nonviolent communication, and learning-based approaches.

As wildlife habitats become increasingly fragmented, sharing landscapes with wildlife is becoming difficult and complex. Because stakeholders with diverging interests struggle to collaborate to manage human-wildlife interactions, new approaches are needed. Here we reflect on a novel participatory learning program we implemented with farmers in communal conservancies in the Zambezi region of Namibia. The 9 week program aimed to understand why human-wildlife conflict remained a challenge. We combined three theoretical framings in the program design-systems thinking, nonviolent communication, and learning based approaches. We summarize key outcomes of each session and reflect on the overall program. We found a synergistic effect of the three framings and concluded that our integrated program had been a useful collaborative learning tool to understand the human-wildlife governance system, identify interventions, empower communities, and build capacity for collaboration to improve human wellbeing and human-wildlife interactions. Drawing on our experience, we make suggestions for how the program could be adapted for similar or other environmental problems elsewhere.

Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence.

Fostering human-wildlife coexistence requires transdisciplinary approaches that integrate multiple sectors, account for complexity and uncertainty, and ensure stakeholder participation. One such approach is participatory scenario planning, but to date, this approach has not been used in human-wildlife contexts. We devised a template for how participatory scenario planning can be applied to identify potential avenues for improving human-wildlife coexistence. We drew on 3 conceptual building blocks, namely the SEEDS framework, the notion of critical uncertainties, and the three-horizons technique. To illustrate the application of the proposed template, we conducted a case study in the Zambezi region of Namibia. We held 5 multistakeholder workshops that involved local people as well as numerous nongovernment and government stakeholders. We identified 14 important wildlife species that generated multiple services and disservices. The subsequent benefits and burdens, in turn, were inequitably distributed among stakeholders. Government actors played particularly influential roles in shaping social-ecological outcomes. We identified 2 critical uncertainties for the future: the nature of governance (fragmented vs. collaborative) and the type of wildlife economy (hunting vs. photography based). Considering these uncertainties resulted in 4 plausible scenarios describing future human-wildlife coexistence. Stakeholders did not agree on a single preferred scenario, but nevertheless agreed on several high-priority strategies. Bridging the remaining gaps among actors will require ongoing deliberation among stakeholders. Navigating the complex challenges posed by living with wildlife requires moving beyond disciplinary approaches. To that end, our template could prove useful in many landscapes around the world.

Planeación de Escenarios Participativos para Facilitar la Coexistencia Humano-Fauna Resumen El fomento a la coexistencia humano-fauna requiere de estrategias transdisciplinarias que integren a múltiples sectores, consideren la complejidad y la incertidumbre y aseguren la participación de los actores. Una de estas estrategias es la planeación de escenarios de participación, pero hasta la fecha no se ha usado dentro de contextos humano-fauna. Diseñamos un modelo para poder aplicar la planeación de escenarios participativos para identificar vías potenciales para mejorar la coexistencia humano-fauna. Nos basamos en tres componentes conceptuales básicos, principalmente el marco de trabajo SEEDS, la noción de incertidumbres críticas y la técnica de los tres horizontes. Para ejemplificar la aplicación del modelo propuesto, realizamos un estudio de caso en la región del Zambeze en Namibia. Realizamos cinco talleres con múltiples actores, los cuales involucraron a los habitantes locales y a numerosos actores gubernamentales y no gubernamentales. Identificamos 14 especies de fauna importantes que generan múltiples servicios y perjuicios. Los beneficios y problemas subsecuentes, en cambio, estaban distribuidos injustamente entre los actores. Los actores gubernamentales tuvieron notablemente un papel de mucha influencia en la formación de los resultados socioecológicos. Identificamos dos incertidumbres importantes para el futuro: la naturaleza de la gestión (fragmentada versus colaborativa) y el tipo de economía faunística (basada en la cacería versus basada en la fotografía). Cuando consideramos estas incertidumbres, obtuvimos como resultado cuatro escenarios posibles descriptivos de la coexistencia humano-fauna en el futuro. Los actores no estuvieron de acuerdo sobre ningún escenario preferido; sin embargo, sí coincidieron en varias estrategias de prioridad alta. El cierre de las brechas restantes requerirá de una continua deliberación entre los actores. La navegación de los retos complejos generados por la convivencia con la fauna requiere ir más allá de las estrategias disciplinarias. Para este fin, nuestro modelo podría ser útil en muchos paisajes alrededor del mundo.

Meta-analysis of attitudes toward damage-causing mammalian wildlife.

Many populations of threatened mammals persist outside formally protected areas, and their survival depends on the willingness of communities to coexist with them. An understanding of the attitudes, and specifically the tolerance, of individuals and communities and the factors that determine these is therefore fundamental to designing strategies to alleviate human-wildlife conflict. We conducted a meta-analysis to identify factors that affected attitudes toward 4 groups of terrestrial mammals. Elephants (65%) elicited the most positive attitudes, followed by primates (55%), ungulates (53%), and carnivores (44%). Urban residents presented the most positive attitudes (80%), followed by commercial farmers (51%) and communal farmers (26%). A tolerance to damage index showed that human tolerance of ungulates and primates was proportional to the probability of experiencing damage while elephants elicited tolerance levels higher than anticipated and carnivores elicited tolerance levels lower than anticipated. Contrary to conventional wisdom, experiencing damage was not always the dominant factor determining attitudes. Communal farmers had a lower probability of being positive toward carnivores irrespective of probability of experiencing damage, while commercial farmers and urban residents were more likely to be positive toward carnivores irrespective of damage. Urban residents were more likely to be positive toward ungulates, elephants, and primates when probability of damage was low, but not when it was high. Commercial and communal farmers had a higher probability of being positive toward ungulates, primates, and elephants irrespective of probability of experiencing damage. Taxonomic bias may therefore be important. Identifying the distinct factors explaining these attitudes and the specific contexts in which they operate, inclusive of the species causing damage, will be essential for prioritizing conservation investments.

Size, rarity and charisma: valuing African wildlife trophies.

We explore variation in the prices paid by recreational hunters of trophy animals in Africa and its possible causes, including perceived rarity. Previous work has raised the possibility that extinction can result if demand rises fast enough as a species becomes rarer. We attempt to disentangle this from other inter-correlated influences affecting price. Species with larger body sizes and larger trophies were more valuable. Value increased less steeply as a function of size for bovids than for felids and the effect was consistent across countries. Power laws, ubiquitous in physical and social systems, described the trends. The exponent was approximately 0.4 for bovids, compared with approximately 1.0 for felids. Rarity (as indexed by IUCN score) influenced the value of bovid trophies - price was higher for species in categories denoting higher global threat. There was substantial variation in price among and within families not explained by either size or rarity. This may be attributable to a 'charisma' effect, which seems likely to be a general attribute of human perceptions of wildlife. Species where prices were higher than predicted by size or rarity are ranked high in published accounts of desirability by hunters. We conclude that the valuation of these species is explicable to a large extent by body size and perceived rarity, and that differences in valuation between taxonomic groups are related to less easily quantified 'charisma' effects. These findings are relevant for conservationists considering the threat status of species exploited in open access markets, and where license quotas are adjusted in response to changes in perceived rarity.