Effective nature conservation in human-dominated landscapes requires a deep understanding of human behaviors, perceptions and values. Human-wildlife conflicts represent relatively well-studied, global-scale conservation challenges. In Africa, vulture populations are collapsing as they fall victim to poison used by livestock farmers to kill predators, but our understanding of the prevalence of this practice is still very poor.We gathered data on the prevalence of poison use in Namibia by means of questionnaires filled by commercial farmers. The data were collected and analyzed with ad-hoc quantitative methods. We quantified prevalence of poison use, determined factors associated with this practice and derived a map of its prevalence. We found that 20% of commercial farmers in Namibia used poison; farmers that owned high numbers of small stock and on large farms, and those who had suffered high livestock losses to predators, were most likely to admit to using poison. We pinpoint areas of high prevalence of reported poison use, which are largely concentrated in the south of the country. Furthermore, we report a generally positive perception of commercial farmers towards vultures, which may indicate future potential to implement bottom-up approaches for vulture conservation. Overall, the findings have important implications for prioritizing efforts to effectively tackle the African vulture crisis and preserve healthy ecosystems for the wellbeing of humans and wildlife.

No abstract

Qualitative methods are important in gaining a deep understanding of complex problems and poorly researched areas. They can be particularly useful to help explain underlying conservation problems, as in Rust et al. (2016). However, the significance in choosing and justifying appropriate methodological frameworks in conservation studies should be given more attention to ensure data are collected and analysed appropriately.

1. Netflix recently launched its high-profile nature documentary Our Planet. Voiced by Sir David Attenborough in English (with Salma Hayek, Penelope Cruz and other Hollywood actors voicing versions simultaneously released in 10 other languages),Netflix are making a clear play for core BBC territory. However, they claim that this is a nature documentary with a difference as it puts the threats facing nature front and center to the narrative.2. We coded the scripts of Our Planet, and those of three recent Attenboroughvoiced BBC documentaries, to explore the extent to which threats (and conservation action and success) are discussed. The only other series which comes close to the frequency with which these issues are discussed is Blue Planet II, but Our Planet is unique in weaving discussion of these issues throughout all episodes rather than keeping them to a dedicated final episode. However, although Our Planet sounds different to other documentaries, the visuals are very similar.Nature is still mostly shown as pristine, and the presence or impacts of people on the natural world very seldom appear. We discuss the potential consequences of nature documentaries erasing humans from the land/seascape. 3. We also discuss the mechanisms by which nature documentaries may have a positive impact on conservation. Despite links between information provision and behaviour change being complex and uncertain, nature documentaries may, at least in theory, elicit change in a number of ways. They may increase willingness amongst viewers to make personal lifestyle changes, increase support for conservation organizations, and generate positive public attitudes and subsequently social norms towards an issue, making policy change more likely. 4. Netflix is certainly bringing biodiversity and the threats it faces into the mainstream, but the mechanisms by which viewing these representations translates to concrete behaviour change are poorly understood. Increasing interest in robust impact evaluation, integrating qualitative and quantitative methods, means the | 421People and Nature JONES Et al.

Human-wildlife conflict has historically been portrayed as a management problem where solutions lie in technical changes or financial incentives. However, recent research shows many conflicts stem from social, economic, and political drivers. We undertook qualitative data collection on livestock farms to determine whether relationships between farmers and their workers affected frequency of reported livestock depredation in Namibia. We found that the conflict was affected by social and economic inequalities embedded in the previous apartheid regime. Macro-and microlevel socioeconomic problems created an environment where livestock depredation was exacerbated by unmotivated farm workers. Poor treatment of workers by farmers resulted in vengeful behaviors, such as livestock theft and wildlife poaching. Successfully addressing this situation therefore requires recognition and understanding of its complexity, rather than reducing it to its most simplistic parts.