Perspectives of “Conflict” at the Wildlife–Agriculture Boundary: 10 Years On

Previously I argued that prioritizing farmers’ concerns, priorities, and understandings of human–wildlife interactions was central to developing effective human–wildlife conflict (HWC) mitigation, presupposing that HWC is about the costs of coexisting with wildlife. Further experience and the wider literature suggest this is not always true. Identifying and addressing underlying and unresolved tensions among different stakeholder groups is increasingly recognized as key to managing HWCs. However, terms like “HWC” or “crop-raiding” obscure the nature of, and appropriate responses to, such “conflicts.” Additionally, we should recognize how culturally constructed, symbolic meanings of animals feed into discourse around “conflicts” and conservation. Competing constructions of animals reflect different agendas, perspectives, and values, which all contribute to “conflicts” around wildlife.