Human–Wildlife Interactions: Turning Conflict into Coexistence . Frank, B., J.A. Glikman, and S. Marchini, editors. 2019. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. xxii+ 456 pp. £34.99 (paperback). ISBN 978‐1‐108‐40258‐3.

As the human population expands into new areas at a global scale, there is a greater likelihood of frequent interactions between human communities and wildlife. Although coexistence is possible, competition for resources and fear of the unknown often results in conflict. Well‐known examples of human–wildlife conflict (HWC) include elephant raids on crops in Asia, big cat predation of livestock in Africa, and armadillo raids on honey hives in South America (Zimmerman 2019). With the diversity of examples and the different cultural and socioeconomic contexts, it is clear that HWC requires a dynamic interdisciplinary approach to be understood and managed. There are now a wide range of case studies available to illustrate this point and several are presented in this well‐put‐together textbook. The editors suggest that initial approaches to HWC often failed because they focused on the ecology and economics of wildlife‐related losses and did not deal with the underlying causes of the conflict. They suggest that there needs to be more focus on the human dimension of HWC and further assessment of the reasons behind the conflict, as well as the differing perspectives of local communities and the wild species they interact with (Frank 2016). There is an evolving body of literature describing the development of acceptance and tolerance of living with wildlife (Hill et al. 2017; Pooley et al. 2017). There is also a growing recognition that many examples of what appears to be HWC are actually a reflection of human–human conflicts and an associated lack of trust toward the agencies or authorities overseeing wildlife (Fraser‐Celin et al. 2018). Woodroffe et al. (2005) previously presented a range of management strategies and policies used to reduce HWC and encourage human–wildlife coexistence. Their recommendations include economic incentives, technical solutions, legal protection, and community involvement. However, in reality, lethal and nonlethal methods have been used to dissuade wildlife from consuming crops and attacking or competing with livestock, whereas legal and economic instruments have generally been directed toward individuals and communities to prevent them from retaliating against wildlife. It is clear from the wider literature, that every HWC situation is different and directly comparing one scenario with another can be misleading.

In the introductory chapter of the book, the editors state that HWC is also an urgent challenge for conservation. However, it is clear that situations differ with the species involved, geographical region, and cultural context. It is also apparent that no single approach has been successfully applied across a wide range of scenarios, although lessons learned can often lead to the development of novel approaches to reduce HWC. In the other 19 chapters, the editors engage a wide range of authors, from all over the world, with broad expertise in ecology and the social sciences. There is a useful map at the start of the book that indicates the scope and location of case studies covered. From the various case studies selected, it is evident that the consideration of social science and anthropological studies, as well as the biology and ecology, of the species and ecosystems involved is important to ensure that sustainable and effective conservation plans can be developed. This also requires a shared responsibility and an understanding of the real reasons for the potential conflict between wildlife and communities. There has been some success using this approach, for example, in Bangladesh with tiger conservation and in Kenya with lion conservation. It is acknowledged, however, that there may still be cases in which a particular so‐called problem animal may need to be removed or relocated.

Other successful projects that have promoted human–wildlife coexistence include the use of beehive fences to protect crops from elephants (chapter 7) and the Lion Guardians project in which large carnivores are monitored to protect local communities in southern Kenya (chapter 17). Some successful approaches have been applied elsewhere in similar contexts, for example, the Lion Defenders in Tanzania (i.e., the Ruaha Carnivore Project). Both projects are supported by The Pride Alliance, which aims to conserve lions across Africa http://pridelionalliance.org/.

The editors suggest that there are many factors to consider in the move from HWC to human–wildlife coexistence. This includes, but is not limited to the species involved, the context and location in which the species is encountered, the culture of the local community, the sociocultural background, current conservation activities and enforcement practices, and economic benefits (Frank 2016). Figure 20.1 is a word cloud that provides insight into the complexity of the interactions between humans and wild animals. A core component recognized is the significance of psychological and emotional influences, whereas scientific papers traditionally follow the rational‐cognitive approach. To fully appreciate this, a close understanding of the culture and experience base of the local communities engaged in the human–wildlife interaction is required (Fulton et al. 1996; Hrubes et al. 2001). In the final chapter, the editors endeavor to make a strong case for looking forward toward human–wildlife coexistence and suggest an approach to be applied to future programs. Due to the multifaceted interdisciplinary approach presented, this book should be of interest to a wide range of readers, including academics, researchers, students, conservation practitioners, and policy makers.

人类与野生动物的互动：将冲突转变为共存。Frank B.，JA Glikman和S. Marchini编辑。2019.剑桥大学出版社，英国剑桥xxii + 456页，34.99英镑（平装）。ISBN 978-1-108-40258-3。

随着人口在全球范围内扩展到新的领域，人类社区与野生动植物之间频繁互动的可能性更大。尽管可以共存，但是对资源的竞争和对未知的恐惧通常会导致冲突。人类与野生动物冲突（HWC）的著名例子包括对亚洲农作物的大象突袭，非洲大牲畜的大猫捕食以及南美对蜂蜜蜂巢的犰狳突袭（Zimmerman 2019）。由于例子的多样性以及文化和社会经济背景的不同，很明显，HWC需要一种动态的跨学科方法来理解和管理。现在，有大量的案例研究可以说明这一点，并且在精心编写的教科书中介绍了一些案例研究。编辑认为，采用HWC的最初方法通常会失败，因为它们侧重于与野生动植物相关的损失的生态和经济意义，而没有解决冲突的根本原因。他们认为，需要更多地关注HWC的人为因素，并进一步评估冲突背后的原因，以及当地社区和与之互动的野生物种的不同观点（Frank 2016）。不断发展的文献描述了对野生动植物的接受和耐受性的发展（Hill等人2017 ; Pooley等人2017）。也有越来越认识到的似乎是HWC许多例子实际上是人与人冲突的反映和监督对野生动植物的机构或部门（弗雷泽-的Celin等相关的缺乏信任2018）。Woodroffe等。（2005年）先前介绍了一系列用于减少HWC并鼓励人类与野生动物共存的管理策略和政策。他们的建议包括经济激励措施，技术解决方案，法律保护和社区参与。但是，实际上，致命和非致命方法已被用来阻止野生动植物食用农作物以及攻击或与牲畜竞争，而法律和经济手段通常针对个人和社区，以防止他们对野生动植物进行报复。从更广泛的文献中可以明显看出，每种HWC情况都是不同的，直接将一种情况与另一种情况进行比较可能会产生误导。

在本书的介绍性章节中，编辑们指出，HWC也是保护的迫切挑战。但是，很明显情况因所涉及的物种，地理区域和文化背景而异。同样显而易见的是，尽管吸取的经验教训通常可以导致开发减少HWC的新颖方法，但没有一种方法可以成功地应用于各种情况。在其他19章中，编辑们吸引了来自世界各地的众多作者，他们在生态学和社会科学领域拥有广泛的专业知识。本书开头有一幅有用的地图，指出了所涵盖的案例研究的范围和位置。从所选择的各种案例研究中，很明显，社会科学和人类学研究以及生物学和生态学的考虑，所涉物种和生态系统的多样性对于确保制定可持续有效的保护计划很重要。这也需要共同承担责任，并了解野生动植物与社区之间潜在冲突的真正原因。使用这种方法已经取得了一些成功，例如在孟加拉国进行了老虎保护的肯尼亚和肯尼亚进行了狮子的保护。但是，众所周知，在某些情况下，可能需要移除或重新安置特定的所谓问题动物。使用这种方法已经取得了一些成功，例如在孟加拉国进行了老虎保护的肯尼亚和肯尼亚进行了狮子的保护。但是，众所周知，在某些情况下，可能需要移除或重新安置特定的所谓问题动物。使用这种方法已经取得了一些成功，例如在孟加拉国进行了老虎保护的肯尼亚和肯尼亚进行了狮子的保护。但是，众所周知，在某些情况下，可能需要移除或重新安置特定的所谓问题动物。

其他促进人类与野生动物共存的成功项目包括使用蜂箱栅栏保护农作物免受大象侵害（第7章）和监测大型食肉动物以保护肯尼亚南部当地社区的Lion Guardians项目（第17章）。一些成功的方法已在其他类似情况下应用到其他地方，例如坦桑尼亚的狮子捍卫者（即鲁阿哈食肉动物项目）。这两个项目均由The Pride Alliance支持，该联盟旨在保护整个非洲的狮子http://pridelionalliance.org/。

编辑建议，从HWC到人类与野生动物共存的过程中，有许多因素需要考虑。这包括但不限于所涉及的物种，遇到该物种的环境和位置，当地社区的文化，社会文化背景，当前的保护活动和执法做法以及经济利益（2016年8月））。图20.1是一个词云，可深入了解人与野生动物之间相互作用的复杂性。公认的核心要素是心理和情感影响的重要性，而科学论文传统上遵循理性认知方法。为了充分认识到这一点，需要对参与人类与野生动物互动的当地社区的文化和经验基础有深入的了解（Fulton等，1996； Hrubes等，2001）。）。在最后一章中，编辑们竭力为人类与野生动物的共存提供有力的依据，并提出一种可应用于未来节目的方法。由于提出了多学科的跨学科方法，因此本书应该受到广泛读者的青睐，包括学者，研究人员，学生，保护从业人员和政策制定者。