Systematic Map of Human–Raptor Interaction and Coexistence Research

Abstract

Global raptor conservation relies on humans to establish and improve interaction and coexistence. 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 are relatively unknown. As an initial step toward quantifying and characterizing the state of applied, cross-disciplinary literature on human–raptor interactions, we use established systematic map (scoping reviews) protocols to catalog literature and describe trends, identify gaps and biases, and critically reflect on the scope of research. We focus on the peer-reviewed (refereed) literature germane to human–raptor interaction, conflict, tolerance, acceptance, persecution and coexistence. Based on 383 papers retrieved 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; 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.

Raptor persecution, conflict, and coexistence

“…Though the terms HWI and human-wildlife conflict (HWC) are synonymous, it should be noted that many practitioners and researchers engaged in HWI/HWC may not use or are not aware of its terminology. For instance, both HWI and HWC are uncommon terms in the context of raptor conservation and management (17). Regardless of the use or awareness of HWI as a term, it is an established area of research and practice, globally, as people and wildlife inhabit more shared spaces, compete for resources, which drive accumulated societal effects on wildlife (15,18,19).…”

“…To date, the ecological effects of human-raptor interactions are more commonly studied than the proximate sociocultural causes of conflict and coexistence (17). The ecological effects of persecution, coupled with coincident impacts of climate change, habitat loss, and issues among prey populations, have begun to increase the salience of persecution's causes and their mitigation.…”

“…To preface the following overview of raptor persecution, it should be noted that sub-Saharan regions, countries, and cultures are under-represented within the HWC and raptor persecution literature (17,123). As such, eagle and vulture persecution are the primary focus here.…”

Bird Detection and Overall Bird Situational Awareness at Airports

“…or the interaction of man-made structures (e.g., aircraft, buildings, wind turbines, etc.) with birds, and the exploration of the equilibrium between human and bird coexistence (Canney et al, 2022;Dickman, 2010;Nyhus, 2016). Human activities are a fundamental threat to the survival of birds and wildlife, it also constitutes the basis for solving the problem (Dickman, 2010; Schultz, 2011).…”

Raptor conservation experts’ viewpoints about raptors’ contribution to people: a “broken phone game”?

“…Historically, raptor researchers have investigated the ecosystem processes/services and con icts/disservices that raptors provide to humans based primarily from an ecological approach (without considering social or cultural factors; Canney et al, 2021). An ecological approach is useful to rigorously establish the existence of most ecosystem processes/services.…”