UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Human Wildlife Conflict in a Developing India: Projections, Mitigation Strategies, and Legislative Needs by 2047

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.64388/irev9i12-1718925

Auteurs

Dr. Mukul Baijal · Rachit Baijal

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:18:30.363133+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:18:30.363133+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar University

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Human-wildlife conflict has become a central ecological, livelihood, public safety and governance challenge in India. By 2047, the pressure points are expected to intensify because economic expansion, linear infrastructure, peri-urban growth, changing cropping systems, climate variability and the recovery of some large mammals will increasingly overlap in shared landscapes. This paper examines the contemporary Indian conflict landscape, with particular attention to elephants, tigers, leopards, wild pigs, blue bulls, bears, crocodiles, snakes and urban-adapted wildlife. It uses a scenario-based method to project conflict pathways to 2047 and argues that India cannot rely only on compensation, capture or relocation after an incident has occurred. A national transition is required from episodic conflict response to statutory coexistence planning. The analysis finds that the existing framework has important strengths, including the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, Project Tiger and Elephant, the National Wildlife Action Plan 2017-2031, the National Human-Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Strategy and Action Plan, and the recent species-specific guidelines issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. However, it also identifies major gaps: fragmented data systems, uneven compensation delivery, weak corridor protection outside protected areas, inadequate integration of agriculture and insurance policy, limited legal status for rapid response teams and insufficient recognition of local communities as co-managers of coexistence. The paper recommends a 2047 legal and institutional package built around a National Human-Wildlife Coexistence Mission, a statutory conflict registry, legally secured ecological corridors, time-bound compensation and insurance, district-level rapid response units, infrastructure impact audits, local coexistence committees and a clearer procedure for handling dangerous individual animals while preserving the high protection standard of Indian wildlife law. The conclusion is that human safety and wildlife conservation need not be treated as opposing goals. They can be reconciled through landscape planning, accountable governance and community-centered risk reduction.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7164914599

DOI

10.64388/irev9i12-1718925

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites

IN

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Forêt · Espèce · Paysage

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 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.64388/irev9i12-1718925
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7164914599

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w1543529592 · CITES
• openalex:w3199066011 · CITES
• openalex:w4226342853 · CITES
• openalex:w4401742715 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

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