Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40855168›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Balancing act: navigating increasing human-wildlife conflict amidst megafauna recovery in the tropical lowlands of Nepal.

Bijaya Neupane, Johanness Jamaludin, Ambika P Gautam, Dietrich Schmidt-Vogt, Nicholas J Hogarth, Edward L Webb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Bijaya NeupaneDepartment of Forest Sciences, Viikki Tropical Resources Institute, University of Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 7, Helsinki, 00790, Finland. bijaya.neupane@helsinki.fi.
Johanness JamaludinDepartment of Forest Sciences, Viikki Tropical Resources Institute, University of Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 7, Helsinki, 00790, Finland.
Ambika P GautamKathmandu Forestry College, Kathmandu, 44600, Nepal.
Dietrich Schmidt-VogtFaculty of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Freiburg, 79098, Freiburg, Germany.
Nicholas J HogarthDepartment of Forest Sciences, Viikki Tropical Resources Institute, University of Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 7, Helsinki, 00790, Finland.
Edward L WebbDepartment of Forest Sciences, Viikki Tropical Resources Institute, University of Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 7, Helsinki, 00790, Finland. edward.webb@helsinki.fi.

Funding

Rufford Foundation 39423-2Russell E. Train Education for Nature Program (EFN) WWF US EF14061Suomen Metsätieteellinen Seura 20230015WWF Nepal NP15629
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) involving megafauna is a global conservation concern. In the tropical lowlands of Nepal (Terai), the megafauna populations are increasing due to successful conservation efforts, introducing the potential for greater HWC. We analyzed the spatio-temporal trend of reported HWC incidents from 2013 to 2022 in the buffer zones of Bardia and Chitwan National Parks in the Terai. Of the total 14,989 reported HWC incidents, crop raiding (n = 8,129) and livestock depredation (n = 4,611) were the most common. Elephants were responsible for 42.8% of all incidents. Total HWC incidents increased over the 10-year period, and there was a significant association between total population estimates of rhino and tiger and total HWC incidents involving those species. At the site level, this association held except for rhino HWC in Bardia. Similarly, incidents of livestock depredation driven by leopard and tiger, and crop damage incidents from elephant, rhino, and boar, increased over the study period. In contrast, property damage-exclusively by elephants-remained relatively stable in Chitwan but decreased in Bardia, possibly reflecting seasonal and transboundary movement patterns of elephants, or the effectiveness of targeted mitigation measures that have reduced elephant intrusions into settlements. Conflict hotspots-defined as the wards in the top quantile of HWC incidents-indicated priority areas for focused mitigation and remedial efforts. Habitat restoration in the buffer zones and corridors outside PAs could potentially mitigate HWC, but it might simultaneously export HWC to new areas outside the PAs. Targeted community-based mitigation measures should be implemented in the peak raiding periods, and predator-proof sheds would reduce livestock losses; both initiatives require substantial external financial support. Finally, the widespread adoption of livestock insurance that responds to spatiotemporal risk should be considered, along with funding and coordination by government and conservation organizations. Overall, the evidence suggests that successful megafauna conservation may be associated with increased HWC. Nevertheless, our findings offer practical insights to guide species-specific conflict mitigation and HWC management in tropical landscapes where megafauna populations are recovering, and conflicts are intensifying.

Indexed as

Animals, WildConservation of Natural ResourcesAnimalsEcosystemElephantsHumansLivestockNepalTropical ClimateCorridors and livestock insuranceHabitat restorationHotspotMegafauna

Identifiers

PMID40855168
PMCPMC12378417

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.