The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Human–Wildlife Conflict and Coexistence
Abstract
Human interactions with wildlife are a defining experience of human existence. These interactions can be positive or negative. People compete with wildlife for food and resources, and have eradicated dangerous species; co-opted and domesticated valuable species; and applied a wide range of social, behavioral, and technical approaches to reduce negative interactions with wildlife. This conflict has led to the extinction and reduction of numerous species and uncountable human deaths and economic losses. Recent advances in our understanding of conflict have led to a growing number of positive conservation and coexistence outcomes. I summarize and synthesize factors that contribute to conflict, approaches that mitigate conflict and encourage coexistence, and emerging trends and debates. Fertile areas for scholarship include scale and complexity, models and scenarios, understanding generalizable patterns, expanding boundaries of what is considered conflict, using new tools and technologies, information sharing and collaboration, and the implications of global change. The time may be ripe to identify a new field, anthrotherology, that brings together scholars and practitioners from different disciplinary perspectives to address human–wildlife conflict and 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Global trends in emerging infectious diseases
Jones, K. E., Patel, N. G., Levy, M. A., Storeygard, A., Balk, D., Gittleman, J. L., & Daszak, P. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06536 · Cited by 8,338
Defaunation in the Anthropocene
Dirzo, R., Young, H. S., Galetti, M., Ceballos, G., Isaac, N. J. B., & Collen, B. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1251817 · Cited by 4,474 · cited 1×
“Hundreds of terrestrial and marine vertebrate species have become extinct in recorded history, and populations of many remaining species have declined in abundance (19).”
BackgroundTrophic Downgrading of Planet Earth
Estes, J. A., Terborgh, J., Brashares, J. S., Power, M. E., Berger, J., Bond, W. J., Carpenter, S. R., Essington, T. E., Holt, R. D., Jackson, J. B. C., et al. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1205106 · Cited by 4,087
Status and Ecological Effects of the World’s Largest Carnivores
Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1241484 · Cited by 3,667
Complexity of coupled human and natural systems
Liu, J., Dietz, T., Carpenter, S. R., Alberti, M., Folke, C., Moran, E., Pell, A. N., Deadman, P., Kratz, T., Lubchenco, J., et al. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1144004 · Cited by 3,624
Accelerating extinction risk from climate change
Urban, M. C. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaa4984 · Cited by 2,436
The Anthropocene is functionally and stratigraphically distinct from the Holocene
Waters, C. N., Zalasiewicz, J., Summerhayes, C., Barnosky, A. D., Poirier, C., Gałuszka, A., Cearreta, A., Edgeworth, M., Ellis, E. C., Ellis, M., et al. (2016) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aad2622 · Cited by 2,375
Collapse of the world’s largest herbivores
Ripple, W. J., Newsome, T. M., Wolf, C., Dirzo, R., Everatt, K. T., Galetti, M., Hayward, M. W., Kerley, G. I. H., Levi, T., Lindsey, P. A., et al. (2015) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1400103 · Cited by 1,229
Estimation of tiger densities in India using photographic captures and recaptures
Karanth, K. U., & Nichols, J. D. (1998) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[2852:eotdii]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 1,176 · cited 1×
“The application of rigorous statistical sampling methods revolutionized the use of camera traps for monitoring tigers and other wildlife (144), and progress in quantitative analyses could have a similar impact on human–wildlife conflict studies.”
BackgroundDinerstein, E., Loucks, C., Wikramanayake, E., Ginsberg, J., Sanderson, E., Seidensticker, J., Forrest, J., Bryja, G., Heydlauff, A., Klenzendorf, S., et al. (2007) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/b570608 · Cited by 326
Cited by
Welfare assessment and activities of captive elephants in Thailand
Bansiddhi, P., Brown, J. L., & Thitaram, C. (2020) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani10060919 · Cited by 52
Mortality Patterns of Asian Elephants in a Region of Human–Elephant Conflict
LaDue, C. A., Eranda, I., Jayasinghe, C., & Vandercone, R. P. G. (2021) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.1002/jwmg.22012 · Cited by 37
Ecological factors determining barking deer distribution and habitat use in the mid-hills of Nepal
Neupane, B., Dhami, B., Bista, S., Sadadev, B. M., Regmi, S., Shrestha, S., Shrestha, B., Traxmandlová, I., Varachova, S., & Kindlmann, P. (2022) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.894369 · Cited by 24
Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs
Williams, T. D., Kreling, S. E. S., Stanton, L. A., Wilkinson, C. E., Estien, C. O., Schell, C. J., & Carlen, E. J. (2024) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10745-024-00492-7 · Cited by 10
“This fear of predators can be overt and explicit, subtly changing our responses to these species (Clinchy et al., 2011; Prokop & Fančovičová, 2013; Mobbs et al., 2015; Nyhus, 2016).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Nyhus, P. J.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Environment and Resources
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2016-11-01
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 143-171
- ISSN
- 1543-5938 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2050
- OpenAlex
- W2520440274
- Cited by
- 1,007
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 1.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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 Conflict and Coexistence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085634
- The paper
- Nyhus, P. J. (2016). Human–Wildlife Conflict and Coexistence. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085634
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.
