Human–wildlife conflict and coexistence in the African context

Abstract

Human–wildlife interactions are projected to increase globally in association with human population growth, expansion of settlements, human access to previously undisturbed areas, and increasing demand for resources. Some of the most expansive and challenging interactions between humans and wildlife will occur in Africa, the continent with the fastest human population growth. This increase in interactions can lead to human–wildlife conflicts over resources, safety, and livelihoods, which can occur on rangelands used for livestock grazing, in farmland, in urban and peri-urban areas, on the fringes of protected areas, but also within protected areas as wildlife, people and livestock cross jurisdictional boundaries to access resources. Balancing the needs of both humans and wildlife is essential for long-term biodiversity conservation. Mitigating human–wildlife conflicts requires robust knowledge of ecological, social, and economic dynamics, and will rely heavily on understanding the patterns, mechanisms, and trends of conflict. While human–wildlife conflicts are expected to grow, conflict patterns will become more complex in dynamic landscapes with shifting land cover and land use, fluctuating intensity of human activities, greater demand for resources, and a changing climate. Highlighting patterns, mechanisms, and trends in human–wildlife conflict as supported by empirical data is required to identify commonalities and to help management decisions and the channelling of funds towards mitigation. This special issue presents original research on human–wildlife interactions from across African terrestrial systems and the terrestrial–aquatic interface, documenting human–wildlife conflicts, and their manifestation, causes and trends. The collection of papers in this special issue not only provides updated scientific information on the human–wildlife interface in Africa, but also emphasizes the vital role of incorporating communities and their perceptions and attitudes in devising conflict mitigation strategies. The contributions are organized into three thematic sections. The first section includes six papers that explore ecological and anthropogenic drivers of human–wildlife conflict. The second section features five papers detailing various approaches and techniques for mitigating these conflicts. Lastly, the third section comprises five papers that investigate perceptions, social impacts, and the effects on human livelihoods associated with human–wildlife conflict. We hope that this special issue will provide valuable insights to facilitate human–wildlife coexistence initiatives in Africa and around the world. Human–wildlife conflict represents a complex interplay between ecological processes and human activities. Animals depend on access to essential resources, including water and seasonal habitats, which often require extensive home ranges and frequent movement across landscapes. However, human land use and infrastructure increasingly disrupt these movements, forcing animals into human-dominated areas like settlements and farmland. This not only threatens the connectivity of less disturbed wildlife habitats but also poses significant risks to human safety and livelihoods. This section explores the multi-faceted drivers of such conflicts through six studies spanning different geographical contexts and species. Taken together, these studies illustrate the interconnectedness of ecological and anthropogenic factors in human–wildlife conflict. Tiller et al. (2024) highlight the importance of wildlife pathways in maintaining landscape connectivity and mitigating human–wildlife conflict, focusing on elephant Loxodonta africana movement between protected and agricultural areas in the Masai Mara, Kenya. The study revealed that pathway use by elephants peaked during the dry season, with elephants adopting risk-avoidance strategies to minimize human encounters. The study also showed that frequently used pathways were near farms and forests, correlating with higher incidents of crop raiding, and emphasizing the need for strategic management to balance habitat connectivity and conflict mitigation. Schmied née Stommel et al. (2024) investigated how dry season water availability, reduced by upstream agricultural activities, affected the distribution of ungulates in Ruaha National Park, Tanzania, highlighting that different species exhibit varying distances from water sources based on their dietary needs. The study found that grazers stayed closest to water, while omnivores maintained the largest distance, aligning with predictions about species' resilience to anthropogenic reduction in surface water. A study by Kral et al (2024) in Botswana's western Kalahari found that cheetahs Acinonyx jubatus adjusted their activity patterns according to the presence of livestock, becoming more crepuscular on cattle farms, perhaps in connection with livestock activity. In contrast, cheetahs were more nocturnal on game farms, possibly in connection to different perception of human-induced mortality risk. The study highlighted how land use, livestock presence and anthropogenic risk may influence carnivore behaviour, suggesting management strategies like temporal zoning of grazing and night-time cattle enclosures to mitigate human–wildlife conflict. Bhardwaj et al. (2024) examined wildlife mortality caused by railway collisions in Balule Nature Reserve, South Africa. The study found that mammals were most at risk during the dry season, amphibians during the wet season, and that the majority of rail-kills occurred in mixed shrublands. The findings underscore the necessity of implementing mitigation measures in high conservation value areas to minimize the impact of railways on local wildlife. Mossad et al. (2024) studied the impact of anthropogenic land cover on waterbird communities along the Nile in Egypt, using bird census data and satellite imagery. They found that landscape characteristics at larger spatial scales explained more of the species' and guilds' presence than smaller scales. Species richness decreased with increased urbanization, particularly affecting waders and red-listed species. The results stress the importance of assessing species-specific responses to human disturbance at multiple spatial scales for effective conservation planning. Coelho et al. (2024) assessed the impact of traditional shell-fishing on migratory shorebirds in the Bijagós Archipelago, Guinea-Bissau. They found that shellfish resources for shorebirds were better managed in areas with formal protection, while traditional management based on cultural beliefs resulted in poorer stock conditions. Shell-fishing peaked during mid-winter, potentially disturbing shorebirds, but declined during the birds' critical fuelling period, easing direct competition for food. The study also showed minimal indirect effects of sediment disturbance, with a slight reduction in prey density but no significant effect on the available biomass for shorebirds. This section includes four papers that evaluate various technical as well as strategic approaches for reducing human–wildlife conflicts. Montero Botey and Perea (2023) explored the use of infrared barriers to detect African savannah elephants in southern Tanzania, finding that the technology reliably detects adult elephants but has limited effectiveness for subadults. The barriers also detected giraffes and large vehicles, suggesting potential applications for both human–wildlife conflict mitigation and anti-poaching efforts. The results suggest infrared barriers as a cost-effective early-warning system to help reduce human–elephant conflicts. Cook et al. (2023) evaluated four methods to protect large trees in South Africa's Greater Kruger National Park from elephant damage, finding that beehives were the most effective, reducing tree mortality substantially, though they come with higher costs potentially offset by honey production. Concrete pyramids also proved effective if placed at a sufficient radius, while wire-netting helped against bark stripping but not more severe damage, and creosote jars showed limited effectiveness. The findings offer a practical toolkit for managers balancing efficacy and cost to mitigate elephant impacts on key savanna trees. A study by Mayengo et al. (2024) highlights the declining populations of the sitatunga Tragelaphus spekii antelope in Africa due to habitat loss, fragmentation, hunting, and other threats, questioning the effectiveness of current wildlife management approaches. The authors advocate for a shift to ecosystem- and landscape-level strategies, better wetland management, and inclusion of human dimensions in conservation planning. Emphasizing non-invasive techniques for genetic monitoring and fostering positive local attitudes toward wildlife are suggested as essential steps for sustainable sitatunga conservation. Twahirwa et al. (2023) examined population trends of large herbivores in Rwanda's Volcanoes National Park, finding notable increases in buffalo Syncerus caffer and bushbuck Tragelaphus sylvaticus densities and minor increases in elephants and black-fronted duikers Cephalophus nigrifrons between 2008 and 2021. The authors attributed the recovery of these species to the conservation efforts focussed on mountain gorillas Gorilla beringei beringei. Overall, herbivore densities have significantly rebounded since a sharp decline in the late 20th century, demonstrating the broader positive impact of protective measures within the Virunga montane ecosystem. The remaining five papers in this special issue used social science approaches to address different aspects of the human dimension and to explore what is needed to achieve sustainable coexistence between humans and wildlife. Ayalew and Melese (2024) examined the impact of human–wildlife conflict on local livelihoods and wildlife conservation around Alitash National Park in Ethiopia, finding that over half of surveyed households experienced crop damage, primarily from species like common warthogs Phacochoerus africanus, African porcupines Hystrix cristata, and common baboons Papio cynocephalus. Livestock losses were also significant, and while attacks on humans were rare, they still generated negative perceptions and resentment toward wildlife. The study suggests that addressing conflict through alternative livelihoods and context-specific conservation strategies, alongside continuous education, could help mitigate the adverse effects on both local communities and wildlife conservation efforts. Tickle et al. (2024) assessed strategies for sustainable coexistence between people and the growing elephant population in Zimbabwe's Hwange National Park, where elephant numbers exceed management goals and contribute to human–wildlife conflicts. Stakeholder feedback showed support for increasing CITES export quotas and local community benefits, including meat and tourism opportunities, with both culling and regulated hunting suggested as management options. The findings underscore the need for balanced approaches that ensure elephant conservation while meeting local community interests. Fabiano et al. (2024) studied human–wildlife conflict and livelihood dynamics in Angola's Iona National Park, where semi-nomadic residents face threats to livestock and crops from various wildlife species, including leopards Pathera pardus, cheetahs, and Chacma baboons Papio ursinus. Findings reveal overstocking issues and differing perceptions of species-related risks, emphasizing the need for conservation management that balances ecosystem capacity with community needs. The research provides critical baseline insights to guide community-based resource management strategies in arid landscapes like Iona, fostering sustainable coexistence between people and wildlife. Aglissi et al. (2023) assessed local community attitudes toward the reintroduction of lions Panthera leo in Côte d'Ivoire's Comoé National Park following their extirpation due to civil war. Results indicate strong community support for lion reintroduction, with many seeing benefits outweighing risks and expressing willingness to coexist with lions again. Acceptance was influenced by factors such as profession, perceived benefits, and current management practices, underscoring the importance of inclusive, participatory approaches in conservation efforts to ensure community involvement and benefit-sharing. Finally, Marker et al. (2024) evaluated the impact of an outreach program aimed at reducing human–wildlife conflict in four communal conservancies in Namibia, finding that workshops significantly decreased livestock losses and improved local perceptions of predator populations. The workshops helped participants better understand predator ecology, which contributed to more accurate perceptions and effective mitigation of livestock depredation. The results highlight workshops as a valuable strategy for promoting conservation awareness and supporting sustainable livelihoods in communities affected by human–wildlife conflict. The studies presented in this special issue provide a comprehensive overview of the complex dynamics that underpin human–wildlife conflict and the evolving strategies aimed at fostering coexistence in African landscapes. From the ecological and anthropogenic patterns and drivers of conflict to the diverse mitigation methods and the critical role of community engagement, these findings underscore the importance of multi-faceted, context-specific approaches that seek to balance the needs of both humans and wildlife. One of the key insights from this collection of studies is the importance of landscape connectivity in mitigating human–wildlife conflict. Tiller et al. (2024) demonstrate that maintaining wildlife corridors is crucial for species such as elephants, which are forced to traverse human-dominated landscapes to access seasonal resources. However, these corridors also bring wildlife into conflict with agricultural activities, as seen in the Masai Mara, Kenya, where elephants' risk-avoidance behaviour leads them into crop-raiding hotspots. Similarly, Kral et al. (2024) and Schmied née Stommel et al. (2024) highlight how human land use, such as livestock farming and water management, alters wildlife movement determining occurrence and activity patterns, and exacerbates competition for resources. These studies collectively point to the need for integrated land-use planning that accounts for both wildlife habitat requirements and human livelihoods. Another critical takeaway is the role of seasonality and habitat specificity in shaping conflict dynamics. For example, Bhardwaj et al. (2024) emphasize how seasonal variation in wildlife mortality due to railway collisions calls for targeted mitigation measures during high-risk periods. Similarly, the study by Mossad et al. (2024) underscores the necessity of understanding the broader landscape context, as urbanization and anthropogenic disturbances impact species distribution, particularly along vital migratory routes. These findings suggest that temporal and spatial dimensions of human–wildlife conflict need to be carefully considered in management strategies, with particular attention paid to the seasonal and habitat-specific needs of wildlife. The studies on mitigation techniques also present valuable examples how innovative, practical solutions can be integrated into conservation efforts. Montero-Botey and Perea (2023) show how infrared barriers could offer a cost-effective tool for early detection of elephants, which could reduce human–elephant conflict in southern Tanzania. Similarly, Cook et al. (2023) present evidence of the effectiveness of beehives in protecting trees from elephant damage, a solution that simultaneously offers economic benefits through honey production. These practical interventions highlight the potential for non-invasive strategies to address human–wildlife conflict, providing valuable tools for managers working in resource-constrained settings. Despite the promise of these strategies, the human dimension of the conflict remains crucial. The studies that focus on local perceptions and social impacts, such as Ayalew and Melese (2024), Fabiano et al. (2024), and Marker et al. (2024), highlight that mitigating conflict goes beyond ecological and technical solutions. Understanding community attitudes and involving local people in decision-making and co-designing mitigation measures are pivotal for the success of conservation strategies. As seen in the case of the lion reintroduction scoping study in Côte d'Ivoire (Aglissi et al. 2023), communities that feel engaged and benefit from conservation initiatives are more likely to support wildlife conservation efforts. Similarly, educational initiatives, such as the outreach program in Namibia (Marker et al. 2024), have proven to significantly improve local perceptions of predators and reduce livestock losses. These findings emphasize that any successful conflict mitigation strategy must incorporate social considerations, address local concerns, and foster positive relationships between people and wildlife. Lastly, the importance of adaptive, ecosystem-level management strategies is highlighted in Mayengo et al. (2024), who advocate for a more holistic approach to conservation that incorporates human dimensions and broader landscape management. Furthermore, these studies demonstrate that human–wildlife conflict is not only a challenge for conservation but also a critical issue for human well-being. The losses of livestock and crops, as described in Ayalew and Melese (2024), have direct economic and social consequences for local communities, particularly in rural and peri-urban areas. Therefore, conservation strategies must be designed with an understanding of the socio-economic context, including the livelihoods of affected communities. As Tickle et al. (2024) suggest, creating opportunities for local people to benefit from wildlife – whether through tourism, sustainable harvesting, or meat from management interventions – can help ensure that wildlife conservation contributes to human well-being. The findings from various studies in this special issue emphasize that effective conflict mitigation requires ongoing research, adaptive management, and strong collaboration across stakeholders, including local communities, conservationists, and policymakers. In conclusion, the studies presented in this special issue demonstrate the complexity of human–wildlife conflict in Africa and provide a range of measures that incorporate both ecological insights and human dimensions. As human–wildlife interactions continue to increase, especially in regions of rapid human population growth and land use change, a combination of landscape-scale planning, technological innovations, and community engagement will be essential for reducing conflict and fostering sustainable coexistence. The lessons drawn from these studies have significant implications not only for Africa but also for other regions facing similar challenges of human–wildlife conflict worldwide. – Contributions to this special issue were invited by Bogdan Cristescu and Ezequiel Fabiano, who also handled most of the submissions through the review process, helped by regular members of the editorial board of Wildlife Biology. Submissions to this special issue were peer-reviewed by at least two reviewers, using the same criteria and standards as for regular Wildlife Biology manuscripts. Their recommendations were of great help to the editors in deciding whether to publish and to the authors in improving their manuscripts. Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this editorial.