Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research

Human-wildlife interactions are situated within dynamic systems, characterized by social and ecological complexity. Human-wildlife coexistence research, however, typically focuses on one component of these systems in isolation. We inadvertently followed this norm while carrying out semi-structured i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hoffmann, CF, Beck, JM, Kaihula, RW, Montgomery, RA
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: Nature Research 2024
_version_ 1811141268641677312
author Hoffmann, CF
Beck, JM
Kaihula, RW
Montgomery, RA
author_facet Hoffmann, CF
Beck, JM
Kaihula, RW
Montgomery, RA
author_sort Hoffmann, CF
collection OXFORD
description Human-wildlife interactions are situated within dynamic systems, characterized by social and ecological complexity. Human-wildlife coexistence research, however, typically focuses on one component of these systems in isolation. We inadvertently followed this norm while carrying out semi-structured interviews of livestock-owners in Northern Tanzania. As existing literature highlighted that this area was a hotspot for livestock depredation, our research questions focused on human interactions with carnivores. Interestingly, almost three quarters (72%, n = 72 of 100) of study participants independently raised African elephants (Loxodonta africana) as presenting the greatest impediments to coexistence. By centering our interviews on carnivores, we omitted vital components of this complex system. To counteract the effects of this oversimplification, we changed our intended analytical process after data collection. Instead of conducting a quantitative analysis of rates of livestock depredation and perceptions of risk posed by a suite of sympatric carnivores, we applied a grounded theory approach to assess interactions across multiple dimensions of this complex system. Through this transparent effort to realign our approaches with the complexity of the study system, we highlight the importance of designing research approaches that effectively reflect the complexities inherent to human-wildlife coexistence.
first_indexed 2024-09-25T04:35:11Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:80e95d22-b49e-410b-9ca4-18e7d6bf7eeb
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-09-25T04:35:11Z
publishDate 2024
publisher Nature Research
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:80e95d22-b49e-410b-9ca4-18e7d6bf7eeb2024-09-17T20:08:07ZTransparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence researchJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:80e95d22-b49e-410b-9ca4-18e7d6bf7eebEnglishJisc Publications RouterNature Research2024Hoffmann, CFBeck, JMKaihula, RWMontgomery, RAHuman-wildlife interactions are situated within dynamic systems, characterized by social and ecological complexity. Human-wildlife coexistence research, however, typically focuses on one component of these systems in isolation. We inadvertently followed this norm while carrying out semi-structured interviews of livestock-owners in Northern Tanzania. As existing literature highlighted that this area was a hotspot for livestock depredation, our research questions focused on human interactions with carnivores. Interestingly, almost three quarters (72%, n = 72 of 100) of study participants independently raised African elephants (Loxodonta africana) as presenting the greatest impediments to coexistence. By centering our interviews on carnivores, we omitted vital components of this complex system. To counteract the effects of this oversimplification, we changed our intended analytical process after data collection. Instead of conducting a quantitative analysis of rates of livestock depredation and perceptions of risk posed by a suite of sympatric carnivores, we applied a grounded theory approach to assess interactions across multiple dimensions of this complex system. Through this transparent effort to realign our approaches with the complexity of the study system, we highlight the importance of designing research approaches that effectively reflect the complexities inherent to human-wildlife coexistence.
spellingShingle Hoffmann, CF
Beck, JM
Kaihula, RW
Montgomery, RA
Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research
title Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research
title_full Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research
title_fullStr Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research
title_full_unstemmed Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research
title_short Transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives, approaches, and systems in human-wildlife coexistence research
title_sort transparency and adaptability aid in realigning the complexity of objectives approaches and systems in human wildlife coexistence research
work_keys_str_mv AT hoffmanncf transparencyandadaptabilityaidinrealigningthecomplexityofobjectivesapproachesandsystemsinhumanwildlifecoexistenceresearch
AT beckjm transparencyandadaptabilityaidinrealigningthecomplexityofobjectivesapproachesandsystemsinhumanwildlifecoexistenceresearch
AT kaihularw transparencyandadaptabilityaidinrealigningthecomplexityofobjectivesapproachesandsystemsinhumanwildlifecoexistenceresearch
AT montgomeryra transparencyandadaptabilityaidinrealigningthecomplexityofobjectivesapproachesandsystemsinhumanwildlifecoexistenceresearch