Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36823291›Full record

ArticleCommunications biology2023

The unequal burden of human-wildlife conflict.

Alexander R Braczkowski, Christopher J O'Bryan, Christian Lessmann, Carlo Rondinini, Anna P Crysell, Sophie Gilbert, Martin Stringer, Luke Gibson, Duan Biggs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
27.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Creating constellations of coexistence through connections between people in human-wildlife conflict areas.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Alexander R BraczkowskiSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China.
Christopher J O'BryanSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6472-6957
Christian LessmannTechnische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany.
Carlo RondininiCenter for Global Wildlife Conservation, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY, 13210, USA.
Anna P CrysellDepartment of Political Science, University of California Los Angeles, Bunche Hall, 4289, Los Angeles, USA.
Sophie GilbertNature Capital Development, 443 Fillmore Street 380-1418, San Francisco, CA, 94115, USA.
Martin StringerW.H. Bryan Mining and Geology Research Centre Sustainable Minerals Institute, The University of Queensland, Level 4, Sir James Foots Building, St Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia.
Luke GibsonSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China. biodiversity@sustech.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0002-7706-3355
Duan BiggsResilient Conservation, Centre for Planetary Health and Food Security, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Rd, Nathan, QLD, 4111, Australia.
Griffith University · AUThe University of Queensland · AUIfo Institute for Economic Research · DESouthern University of Science and Technology · CNState University of New York · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Idaho · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human-wildlife conflict is one of the most pressing sustainable development challenges globally. This is particularly the case where ecologically and economically important wildlife impact the livelihoods of humans. Large carnivores are one such group and their co-occurrence with low-income rural communities often results in real or perceived livestock losses that place increased costs on already impoverished households. Here we show the disparities associated with the vulnerability to conflict arising from large carnivores on cattle (Bos taurus) globally. Across the distribution of 18 large carnivores, we find that the economic vulnerability to predation losses (as measured by impacts to annual per capita income) is between two and eight times higher for households in transitioning and developing economies when compared to developed ones. This potential burden is exacerbated further in developing economies because cattle keepers in these areas produce on average 31% less cattle meat per animal than in developed economies. In the lowest-income areas, our estimates suggest that the loss of a single cow or bull equates to nearly a year and a half of lost calories consumed by a child. Finally, our results show that 82% of carnivore range falls outside protected areas, and five threatened carnivores have over one third of their range located in the most economically sensitive conflict areas. This unequal burden of human-carnivore conflict sheds light on the importance of grappling with multiple and conflicting sustainable development goals: protecting life on land and eliminating poverty and hunger.

Indexed as

Animals, WildCarnivoraAnimalsCattleChildConservation of Natural ResourcesFemaleHumansLivestockMalePredatory Behavior

Identifiers

PMID36823291
PMCPMC9950466
OpenAlexW4321611409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.