ReviewAmbio2021
Usage, definition, and measurement of coexistence, tolerance and acceptance in wildlife conservation research in Africa.
Review in Ambio, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding Farm Households' Tolerance Toward Asian Elephants in China: Evidence from 873 Households in Yunnan Province.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Renewed coexistence as a conceptual reframing of animal reintroductions to foster sustainable human-wildlife coexistence.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Broadening the spectrum of conflict and coexistence: A case study example of human-wolf interactions in British Columbia, Canada.PloS one · 2025Article
- Beyond Tolerance: Mitigating Human-Wildlife Conflict with Hospitality.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The terms 'coexistence', 'tolerance,' and 'acceptance' appear frequently in conservation literature, but lack consistent characterization, making them difficult to apply across intervention frameworks. This review aims to describe the common characterizations of these three terms using Africa-based research as a case study. Through systematic lexical searches, we identified 392 papers containing one or more of the three terms. We assessed their usage, definition, and measurement (or lack thereof) in wildlife conservation. Coexistence was used in 46% of papers, but was defined in only 2% and measured in 4%. Tolerance and acceptance were used in 63% and 61% of the papers in which they appeared, respectively, defined in 4% and 2%, and measured in 19% and 5%. These results confirm the lack of clear understanding of these concepts and evidence the need for a precise lexicon. This would allow conservationists to cohesively describe their work and increase replicability of research across contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.