Interactions between people and wildlife are often mediated by laws, policies, and other governance instruments with profound implications for species conservation. Despite its importance for conservation practice, governance of these human-wildlife relationships is an under-researched area. Our research aim was to understand the link between law/policy and human-wildlife conflict (HWC) and the implications for species conservation using a systematic quantitative review of the literature on the human dimensions of HWC. We identified 133 relevant HWC studies, conducted in 45 countries, involving 114 species. Over 80% of the articles mentioned law, mainly national-level legislation, with little reference to customary or tribal law. However, only 40%, stated whether the laws had influenced the HWC—most reported negative associations with HWC or a mix of positive and negative associations. The perceived ineffectiveness of law was primarily attributed to lack of implementation, support, and enforcement and perceived erroneous laws. The few positive associations included stakeholder involvement, management flexibility, and adequate compensation. Our findings reveal a knowledge deficit on the detailed effects of law on HWC and conservation conflicts in general. Overall, law as an institution seems to exacerbate or prolong most conflicts instead of providing a pathway to coexistence and enhancing species conservation.
AbstractMotivationForesight methods are increasingly recognized as essential for decision‐making in complex environments, particularly within development and research settings. As foresight methods continue to gain prominence for decision‐making, their application in these settings grows. Funders and policy‐makers can benefit from the experience of transformative foresight practitioners and researchers who are skilled in designing novel ways to envision alternative and diverse development futures.PurposeThe Seeds of Good Anthropocenes (SoGA) initiative has experimented with transformative foresight since its inception in 2016.We position SoGA within the framework of Minkkinen et al. (2019); we present its transformative capacity through participatory visioning; and we explore how foresight methods can shape strategic development options.Approach and methodsWe draw lessons from how SoGA, used extensively in various contexts around the world, has introduced experimental transformative foresight to deal with diversity and complexity. We describe the transformative foresight processes in detail.FindingsSoGA exemplifies how transformative foresight can support policy and change initiatives by providing participants, planners, and decision‐makers with opportunities to reinforce the collaborative and transformative objectives of their policy and convening practices. Such engagement not only deepens the strategic impact of policies, it also encourages a more inclusive and participatory approach to policy development, aligning with broader goals for sustainable and impactful change.