Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence. / Jiren, Tolera Senbeto; Riechers, Maraja; Kansky, Ruth et al.
In: Conservation Biology, Vol. 35, No. 6, 01.12.2021, p. 1957-1965.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Jiren TS, Riechers M, Kansky R, Fischer J. Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence. Conservation Biology. 2021 Dec 1;35(6):1957-1965. Epub 2021 May 31. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13725

Bibtex

@article{dfd7c8ae35c549d08f28b67ed51b1661,
title = "Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence",
abstract = "Fostering human-wildlife coexistence requires transdisciplinary approaches that integrate multiple sectors, account for complexity and uncertainty, and ensure stakeholder participation. One such approach is participatory scenario planning, but to date, this approach has not been used in human-wildlife contexts. We devised a template for how participatory scenario planning can be applied to identify potential avenues for improving human-wildlife coexistence. We drew on 3 conceptual building blocks, namely the SEEDS framework, the notion of critical uncertainties, and the three-horizons technique. To illustrate the application of the proposed template, we conducted a case study in the Zambezi region of Namibia. We held 5 multistakeholder workshops that involved local people as well as numerous nongovernment and government stakeholders. We identified 14 important wildlife species that generated multiple services and disservices. The subsequent benefits and burdens, in turn, were inequitably distributed among stakeholders. Government actors played particularly influential roles in shaping social-ecological outcomes. We identified 2 critical uncertainties for the future: the nature of governance (fragmented vs. collaborative) and the type of wildlife economy (hunting vs. photography based). Considering these uncertainties resulted in 4 plausible scenarios describing future human-wildlife coexistence. Stakeholders did not agree on a single preferred scenario, but nevertheless agreed on several high-priority strategies. Bridging the remaining gaps among actors will require ongoing deliberation among stakeholders. Navigating the complex challenges posed by living with wildlife requires moving beyond disciplinary approaches. To that end, our template could prove useful in many landscapes around the world.",
keywords = "ecosystem services, global south, governance, human-wildlife conflict, transdisciplinarity, Environmental planning",
author = "Jiren, {Tolera Senbeto} and Maraja Riechers and Ruth Kansky and Joern Fischer",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology",
year = "2021",
month = dec,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/cobi.13725",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "1957--1965",
journal = "Conservation Biology",
issn = "0888-8892",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Participatory scenario planning to facilitate human-wildlife coexistence

AU - Jiren, Tolera Senbeto

AU - Riechers, Maraja

AU - Kansky, Ruth

AU - Fischer, Joern

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology

PY - 2021/12/1

Y1 - 2021/12/1

N2 - Fostering human-wildlife coexistence requires transdisciplinary approaches that integrate multiple sectors, account for complexity and uncertainty, and ensure stakeholder participation. One such approach is participatory scenario planning, but to date, this approach has not been used in human-wildlife contexts. We devised a template for how participatory scenario planning can be applied to identify potential avenues for improving human-wildlife coexistence. We drew on 3 conceptual building blocks, namely the SEEDS framework, the notion of critical uncertainties, and the three-horizons technique. To illustrate the application of the proposed template, we conducted a case study in the Zambezi region of Namibia. We held 5 multistakeholder workshops that involved local people as well as numerous nongovernment and government stakeholders. We identified 14 important wildlife species that generated multiple services and disservices. The subsequent benefits and burdens, in turn, were inequitably distributed among stakeholders. Government actors played particularly influential roles in shaping social-ecological outcomes. We identified 2 critical uncertainties for the future: the nature of governance (fragmented vs. collaborative) and the type of wildlife economy (hunting vs. photography based). Considering these uncertainties resulted in 4 plausible scenarios describing future human-wildlife coexistence. Stakeholders did not agree on a single preferred scenario, but nevertheless agreed on several high-priority strategies. Bridging the remaining gaps among actors will require ongoing deliberation among stakeholders. Navigating the complex challenges posed by living with wildlife requires moving beyond disciplinary approaches. To that end, our template could prove useful in many landscapes around the world.

AB - Fostering human-wildlife coexistence requires transdisciplinary approaches that integrate multiple sectors, account for complexity and uncertainty, and ensure stakeholder participation. One such approach is participatory scenario planning, but to date, this approach has not been used in human-wildlife contexts. We devised a template for how participatory scenario planning can be applied to identify potential avenues for improving human-wildlife coexistence. We drew on 3 conceptual building blocks, namely the SEEDS framework, the notion of critical uncertainties, and the three-horizons technique. To illustrate the application of the proposed template, we conducted a case study in the Zambezi region of Namibia. We held 5 multistakeholder workshops that involved local people as well as numerous nongovernment and government stakeholders. We identified 14 important wildlife species that generated multiple services and disservices. The subsequent benefits and burdens, in turn, were inequitably distributed among stakeholders. Government actors played particularly influential roles in shaping social-ecological outcomes. We identified 2 critical uncertainties for the future: the nature of governance (fragmented vs. collaborative) and the type of wildlife economy (hunting vs. photography based). Considering these uncertainties resulted in 4 plausible scenarios describing future human-wildlife coexistence. Stakeholders did not agree on a single preferred scenario, but nevertheless agreed on several high-priority strategies. Bridging the remaining gaps among actors will require ongoing deliberation among stakeholders. Navigating the complex challenges posed by living with wildlife requires moving beyond disciplinary approaches. To that end, our template could prove useful in many landscapes around the world.

KW - ecosystem services

KW - global south

KW - governance

KW - human-wildlife conflict

KW - transdisciplinarity

KW - Environmental planning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85107059708&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/80a04cdf-2af1-3734-9110-cb8bc8abc38a/

U2 - 10.1111/cobi.13725

DO - 10.1111/cobi.13725

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 33634504

VL - 35

SP - 1957

EP - 1965

JO - Conservation Biology

JF - Conservation Biology

SN - 0888-8892

IS - 6

ER -

DOI