Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 489

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Human–wildlife coexistence in a changing world

Open access
König, Hannes J., Kiffner, Christian, Kramer‐Schadt, Stephanie, Fürst, Christine, Keuling, Oliver, Ford, Adam T.·2020·Conservation Biology

Abstract

Human–wildlife conflict (HWC) is a key topic in conservation and agricultural research. Decision makers need evidence‐based information to design sustainable management plans and policy instruments. However, providing objective decision support can be challenging because realities and perceptions of human–wildlife interactions vary widely between and within rural, urban, and peri‐urban areas. Land users who incur costs through wildlife argue that wildlife‐related losses should be compensated and that prevention should be subsidized. Supporters of human–wildlife coexistence policies, such as urban‐dwelling people, may not face threats to their livelihoods from wildlife. Such spatial heterogeneity in the cost and benefits of living with wildlife is germane in most contemporary societies. This Special Section features contributions on wildlife‐induced damages that range from human perspectives (land use, psychology, governance, local attitudes and perceptions, costs and benefits, and HWC and coexistence theory) to ecological perspectives (animal behavior). Building on current literature and articles in this section, we developed a conceptual model to help frame HWC and coexistence dimensions. The framework can be used to determine damage prevention implementation levels and approaches to HWC resolution. Our synthesis revealed that inter‐ and transdisciplinary approaches and multilevel governance approaches can help stakeholders and institutions implement sustainable management strategies that promote human–wildlife coexistence.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/cobi.13513

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Metadata

Authors
König, H. J., Kiffner, C., Kramer‐Schadt, S., Fürst, C., Keuling, O., & Ford, A. T.
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05-14
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
786-794
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W3024411896
Cited by
489
References
56
FWCI
25.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Human–wildlife coexistence in a changing world. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/cobi.13513
The paper
König, H. J., Kiffner, C., Kramer‐Schadt, S., Fürst, C., Keuling, O., & Ford, A. T. (2020). Human–wildlife coexistence in a changing world. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13513

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.