Recent extinctions often resulted from humans retaliating against wildlife that threatened people's interests or were perceived to threaten current or future interests. Today's subfield of human-wildlife conflict and coexistence (HWCC) grew out of an original anthropocentric concern with such real or perceived threats and then, starting in the mid-1990s, with protecting valued species from people. Recent work in ethics and law has shifted priorities toward coexistence between people and wild animals. To spur scientific progress and more effective practice, we examined 4 widespread assumptions about HWCC that need to be tested rigorously: scientists are neutral and objective about HWCC; current participatory, consensus-based decisions provide just and fair means to overcome challenges in HWCC; wildlife threats to human interests are getting worse; and wildlife damage to human interests is additive to other sources of damage. The first 2 assumptions are clearly testable, but if they are entangled can become a wicked problem and may need debunking as myths if they cannot be disentangled. Some assumptions have seldom or never been tested and those that have been tested appear dubious, yet the use of the assumptions continues in the practice and scholarship of HWCC. We call for tests of assumptions and debunking of myths in the scholarship of HWCC. Adherence to the principles of scientific integrity and application of standards of evidence can help advance our call. We also call for practitioners and interest groups to improve the constitutive process prior to decision making about wildlife. We predict these steps will hasten scientific progress toward evidence-based interventions and improve the fairness, ethics, and legality of coexistence strategies.

中文翻译：

---

关于人类与野生动物冲突和共存的神话和假设

最近的灭绝通常是由于人类报复威胁人们利益或被认为威胁当前或未来利益的野生动物。今天的人类与野生动物冲突与共存 (HWCC) 子领域源于对此类真实或感知威胁的原始人类中心主义关注，然后从 1990 年代中期开始，保护有价值的物种免受人类侵害。最近在伦理和法律方面的工作已将优先事项转向人与野生动物的共存。为了促进科学进步和更有效的实践，我们研究了 4 个需要严格检验的关于 HWCC 的普遍假设：科学家对 HWCC 持中立和客观态度；当前的参与式、基于共识的决策为克服 HWCC 中的挑战提供了公正和公平的手段；野生动物对人类利益的威胁越来越严重；野生动物对人类利益的损害是其他损害来源的累加。前两个假设显然是可测试的，但如果它们被纠缠在一起，就会成为一个棘手的问题，如果它们无法解开，则可能需要揭穿神话。一些假设很少或从未经过测试，那些经过测试的假设看起来很可疑，但在 HWCC 的实践和学术中继续使用这些假设。我们呼吁在 HWCC 的奖学金中检验假设和揭穿神话。坚持科学完整性和证据标准应用的原则有助于推进我们的呼吁。我们还呼吁从业者和利益团体在做出有关野生动物的决策之前改进构成过程。