Understanding and managing conservation conflicts.

By Steve Redpath, J. Young, A. Evely, W. Adams, W. J. Sutherland, A. Whitehouse, A. Amar, R. Lambert, J. Linnell, A. Watt and 1 more. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2013

1,275 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/40682b42aa17b34cff252a4a028740800bc7b4f4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Megafires: an emerging threat to old-forest species (2016, background): “Managers and policy makers will be faced with challenging decisions regarding the pace and scale of forest restoration efforts in light of scientific uncertainty and conflict among stakeholders (Redpath et al. 2013).”
Foraging ecology of black bears in urban environments: guidance for human‐bear conflict mitigation (2015, background): “…(i.e., good vs. poor years), reducing conflicts between bears and humans will require long-term commitments from wildlife agencies, municipalities, and urban residents, and engagement of all stakeholders coupled with clear management goals and a willingness to share costs (Redpath et al. 2013).”
Roles of Raptors in a Changing World: From Flagships to Providers of Key Ecosystem Services (2016, background): “Among the conflicts between wildlife and humans, the commonest scenario is related to the coexistence between herbivores of economic importance and threatened predators (mainly carnivores and raptors) (Peterson et al., 2010; Redpath et al., 2013, Redpath et al., 2015).”
Ecology in an anthropogenic biosphere (2015, background): “…this, it is more necessary than ever to integrate sociocultural understanding into conservation (WaltnerToews et al. 2003, Mooney et al. 2013, Redpath et al. 2013, Ives and Kendal 2014, Kueffer and KaiserBunbury 2014, Mace 2014, Palomo et al. 2014, Poe et al. 2014), and to consider flexible…”
Warring brothers: The complex interactions between wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris) in a conservation context (2014, positive): “Although the numbers of dogs killed per year are relatively low, this killing can be the driver of very intense conservation conflicts (Redpath et al., 2013) that can have negative impacts on human willingness to share space with wolves due to the special relationship that exists between people and ”
Large carnivore damage in Europe: Analysis of compensation and prevention programs (2019, background): “Such situations can lead to high economic losses and intense social conflicts between conservationists and the farmers that feel threatened by the presence of large carnivores (Redpath et al., 2013).”
Mental models for conservation research and practice (2019, background): “Conservation can quickly emerge as conflict, which stems from different stakeholder perceptions and values about the need for and approaches to conservation (e.g., Biggs et al., 2011; Redpath et al., 2013).”
Key factors driving attitudes towards large mammals in conflict with humans (2014, background): “This finding supports recent qualitative reviews emphasizing the importance of non-tangible cost variables (Barua et al., 2013; Dickman, 2010; Redpath et al., 2013).”
The challenges and opportunities of coexisting with wild ungulates in the human-dominated landscapes of Europe's Anthropocene (2019, neutral): “The result is that while there are many situations where ungulates cause costs to human economic assets and interests, there are also many conflicts between stakeholders over the way that ungulates should be managed (Bredin et al., 2015; Redpath et al., 2013).”