UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Human–wildlife coexistence needs more evidence‐based interventions to reduce the losses of crops, livestock and fishery catches

Identification

Clé publique

radar:r-33a15f4a8dc482a3f9b9f20da9f3f53a

Auteurs

Cheng Wei Huang · Yiqing Chen · Lili Li · Ahimsa Campos‐Arceiz · Yi Wang · Kenneth Otieno Onditi · Zhongqiu Li · Limin Feng · Yang Liu · Tien Ming Lee

Année déclarée

2025

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-13T12:49:32.129301+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-13T12:49:32.129301+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Sun Yat-sen University · Australian National University · Chinese Academy of Sciences · Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden · Kunming Institute of Zoology · National Museums of Kenya · State Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution · Sino-Africa Joint Research Center · Nanjing University · Beijing Normal University

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

AU · CN · KE

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Abstract Evidence‐based interventions designed to reduce wildlife‐caused losses are essential for human–wildlife coexistence. The lack of systematic summarization of research effort and evidence makes it challenging for researchers, managers and policymakers to prioritize interventions for evaluation and implementation. Here, we compiled experimental case studies of nonlethal technical interventions designed to reduce the losses of crops, livestock and fishery catches caused by terrestrial carnivores, elephants, farmland birds and marine fauna worldwide. Then, we summarized the research effort and the performance of interventions by their sensory stimuli and target animals. We found that: (i) 54 of 88 interventions included in this study had statistically effective evidence, where only 39% (21/54) were evaluated with more than three experiments; (ii) physical‐, sound‐, chemical‐ and light (or visual) ‐based interventions were the most in numbers and their performance varied greatly; (iii) farmland birds, seabirds and cetaceans were the most studied animal groups while there are only a few experiments for elephants; and (iv) the interventions for marine fauna generally had no impact on the target catch of fisheries. Syntheses and applications: Our results indicated that collective effort is needed to further evaluate interventions using various sensory stimuli and launch incentive programs to motivate the implementation of interventions, particularly related to marine fauna conservation. Our synthesis could be helpful for stakeholders to tackle the negative human‐wildlife interactions outlined as Target 4 of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

https://openalex.org/W4406851785

DOI

10.1111/1365-2664.14857

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

article

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Éditeurs

Wiley

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1

• Document · https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14857

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.