Caught in statistical noise: pitfalls of a unidimensional approach to understanding biodiversity-conflict relationships

The negative impacts of warfare and prolonged human conflict on biodiversity knowledge are noncontroversial. Understanding and inferring their negative causal relationships, although intuitive and inferred in past studies, requires delving into diverse pathways through which conflict might negatively affect the understanding of biodiversity 1 , 2 . In a recent study, Hilario–Husain and colleagues (hereafter “HH”) 3 utilized a spatially explicit analysis to explore relationships between human conflict and biodiversity knowledge on Mindanao Island, southern Philippines. Their findings showed that regions in Mindanao marked by heightened conflict exhibited lower observed species richness, fewer occurrence records, and reduced forest cover. Although the authors advised cautious interpretation, their narrative discusses a negative causal relationship (i.e., impact ) of conflict on biodiversity knowledge and conservation. While we applaud their admirable probing of this important question, we note that several of their conclusions, although intuitive, are likely premature and may require substantial reconsideration, reanalysis, and a more nuanced interpretation.