ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
Mitigating Human-Wild Boar Conflicts: A Review of Integrated Strategies and Future Directions.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wild boar populations have expanded globally due to factors such as habitat restoration, climate change, and adjustments in hunting policies. This expansion has led to agricultural losses, threats to public safety, disease transmission, and ecological damage, thereby exacerbating human-animal conflicts. Current strategies for mitigating conflicts between wild boars and humans face challenges, including insufficient assessment of long-term control effects and limitations in population dynamics monitoring technologies. This paper reviews mitigation strategies for global wild boar conflicts from ecological, economic, and social perspectives and provides a comprehensive evaluation for their effectiveness. Existing mitigation strategies include population control (hunting management and reproductive regulation), habitat management (landscape barriers and food resource regulation), physical protection (electric fences and multimodal deterrence devices), and community engagement mechanisms (ecological compensation and participatory management). The effectiveness of these strategies varies significantly across regions. Global case studies on human-wild boar conflicts demonstrate that multidimensional collaborative governance has achieved notable success in mitigating these conflicts. For example, dynamic management systems based on intelligent monitoring and community participation can effectively reduce the incidence of wild boar conflicts. Given the limitations of the current single-indicator evaluations, this paper proposes a comprehensive evaluation framework encompassing "strategy effectiveness, cost, and sustainability". The application of synergistic multi-strategy approaches produces significant synergistic effects, exhibiting nonlinear superposition characteristics. Therefore, future efforts should integrate intelligent early warning systems and policy reforms to develop an adaptive social-ecological coupling framework.
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.