Systematic map of human-raptor interaction and coexistence research

Abstract

Global raptor conservation relies on humans to establish and improve interaction and coexistence with raptor species. Human-wildlife interaction research is well-established, but tends to focus on large-bodied, terrestrial mammals. The scope and characteristics of research that explores human-raptor interactions is relatively unknown. As an initial step toward quantifying and characterizing the state of applied, cross-disciplinary literature in human-raptor interactions, we use established systematic map protocols to catalog the literature and describe trends, identify gaps and biases, and critically reflect on the state of the literature. We focus on peer-reviewed literature germane to human-raptor interaction, conflict, tolerance, acceptance, and coexistence. Based on the 383 papers retrieved from the literature that fit our criteria, we identified trends, biases, and gaps. These include a majority of research taking place within North America and Europe; disproportionately few interdisciplinary and social research studies; interactions focused on indirect anthropogenic mortality (poisons and wind turbine collisions); and vague calls for human behavior changes, with few concrete steps suggested, when management objectives are discussed. Overall, we note a predominant focus on the study of ecological effects from human-raptor interactions rather than sociocultural causes and suggest (as others have in various conservation contexts) the imperative of human behavioral, cultural, and political inquiry to conserve raptor species.

We are silently paving the way toward human–wildlife coexistence: The role of women in the rural landscapes of southern Andes

“…In rural landscapes, interactions between these cohabitants can cause some friction due to competition over resources and habitat use. Management of human-wildlife conflicts (HWC) has received increasing attention from researchers because it negatively impacts both wildlife and local communities that have traditionally dwelled on the land (Treves et al, 2006;Nyphus, 2016;Crespin and Simonetti, 2019;Araneda et al, 2021;Canney et al, 2021). Most of the studies addressing this topic have failed to acknowledge how the impact of HWC on humans differs between genders and is often asymmetrically adverse for women (Barua et al, 2013;Khumalo and Yung, 2015;Banerjee and Sharma, 2021).…”