Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38285935›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024

Effects of climate, land use, and human population change on human-elephant conflict risk in Africa and Asia.

Mia Guarnieri, Grace Kumaishi, Cameryn Brock, Mayukh Chatterjee, Ezequiel Fabiano, Roshni Katrak-Adefowora, Ashley Larsen, Taylor M Lockmann, Patrick R Roehrdanz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Effects of climate, land use, and human population change on human-elephant conflict risk in Africa and Asia.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    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.

Mia GuarnieriBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131.ORCID 0009-0001-7268-1090
Grace KumaishiBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131.ORCID 0009-0003-9058-1821
Cameryn BrockMoore Center for Science, Conservation International, Arlington, VA 22202.ORCID 0000-0001-6857-6389
Mayukh ChatterjeeNorth of England Zoological Society, Upton, Chester CH2 1LP, United Kingdom.
Ezequiel FabianoDepartment of Wildlife Management and Tourism Studies, University of Namibia, Katima Mulilo 1096, Namibia.ORCID 0000-0002-4126-5270
Roshni Katrak-AdefoworaBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131.
Ashley LarsenBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131.ORCID 0000-0001-7491-9245
Taylor M LockmannBren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131.
Patrick R RoehrdanzMoore Center for Science, Conservation International, Arlington, VA 22202.ORCID 0000-0003-4047-5011

Funding

National Science Foundation (NSF) NSF DEB-2042526
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human-wildlife conflict is an important factor in the modern biodiversity crisis and has negative effects on both humans and wildlife (such as property destruction, injury, or death) that can impede conservation efforts for threatened species. Effectively addressing conflict requires an understanding of where it is likely to occur, particularly as climate change shifts wildlife ranges and human activities globally. Here, we examine how projected shifts in cropland density, human population density, and climatic suitability-three key drivers of human-elephant conflict-will shift conflict pressures for endangered Asian and African elephants to inform conflict management in a changing climate. We find that conflict risk (cropland density and/or human population density moving into the 90th percentile based on current-day values) increases in 2050, with a larger increase under the high-emissions "regional rivalry" SSP3 - RCP 7.0 scenario than the low-emissions "sustainability" SSP1 - RCP 2.6 scenario. We also find a net decrease in climatic suitability for both species along their extended range boundaries, with decreasing suitability most often overlapping increasing conflict risk when both suitability and conflict risk are changing. Our findings suggest that as climate changes, the risk of conflict with Asian and African elephants may shift and increase and managers should proactively mitigate that conflict to preserve these charismatic animals.

Indexed as

ElephantsHominidaeAfricaAnimalsAnimals, WildAsiaClimate ChangeConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemHumansbiodiversityclimate changehuman–wildlife conflictland use changespecies distribution modeling

Identifiers

PMID38285935
PMCPMC10861898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.