Explore the vast range of titles available.

Although biodiversity conservation is a prioritized topic globally, agreements and regulations at multiple levels often fail to meet the desired effects due to insufficient knowledge transmission about and tolerance toward environmental protection measures among the public. To find effective measures to solve human–wildlife conflicts (HWCs) and promote a sustainable coexistence, it is essential to gain the public's understanding of the importance of preserving biodiversity. To spur progress in solution‐oriented conservation science, we examine how citizen science (CS) can complement research in the HWC field and coexistence/mitigation strategies. We find that CS (1) is an effective tool for gathering wildlife data and (2) empowers citizens to participate in or drive (in a bottom‐up manner) wildlife research and management. Each HWC has a unique social, economic, and geographical context, which makes it challenging to find appropriate mitigation measures. We developed a Global and Local Geographic (GLG) model that provides practical guidelines for implementing CS in HWC research. We argue that the inclusion of youth is fundamental to achieving coexistence between people and wildlife; thus integrating CS into formal education or including an educational component in CS projects can support the sustainable conservation of wildlife species and foster environmentally aware future generations.

As wild areas disappear and agricultural lands expand, understanding how people and wildlife can coexist becomes increasingly important. Human–wildlife conflicts (HWCs) are obstacles to coexistence and negatively affect both wildlife populations and the livelihood of people. To facilitate coexistence, a number of frameworks have been developed to both understand the drivers of conflict and then to find solutions that mitigate conflict. However, each framework has different foci and strengths in particular stages of analysis. Here, we propose an integrated framework that leverages the individual strengths of previously fairly isolated methodologies, allowing for holistic HWC analysis. The framework for participatory impact assessment (FoPIA) provides a toolset for developing wildlife scenarios, selecting assessment indicators and assessing the impact of different scenarios. The social‐ecological framework of ecosystem services and disservices (SEEDS) analyzes the ecosystem services trade‐offs related to scenarios, and the 3i stakeholder analysis approach, supports the identification of stakeholders and provides a mechanism to explore, in detail stakeholders' interests, relative influence, and how outcomes of research are likely to impact different stakeholders. We apply these approaches to eastern Germany, where the increase in several wildlife populations (i.e., wild boar, common crane, gray wolf, and European bison) has contributed to conflict with people. We demonstrate the complementarity of FoPIA, SEEDS, and 3i in identifying stakeholder needs and showing how wildlife dynamics may affect coexistence and create imbalanced ecosystem service and disservice distributions. The integrated framework introduced here provides guidelines for analyzing the multistage process of stakeholder participation and enables a comprehensive approach to the complex challenge of HWCs.

In modern landscapes, the sustainable coexistence of humans and wildlife depends on involving stakeholders in the development and implementation of management strategies. This is particularly important for species like the European bison (Bison bonasus) and Eurasian moose (Alces alces), which are reoccupying regions between Germany and Poland after a prolonged absence. The return of these species generates mixed emotions, as interactions with these species are associated with both costs and benefits to people. Addressing the apparent unpreparedness in managing these trade‐offs, we implemented a digital participatory impact assessment in two steps. First, we engaged bison and moose experts to develop management scenarios and assessment criteria. Then, in a subsequent virtual workshop, stakeholders evaluated four scenarios along economic, social, and ecological dimensions. Quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed divergent perspectives and priorities, yet consensus emerged on the necessary future steps: formulating a comprehensive management strategy with guidelines and protocols for managing specific conflict scenarios, such as the incursion of large herbivores onto highways. Our approach underscores the importance of early stakeholder engagement in fostering a more equitable and sustainable management of human‐wildlife interactions. Moreover, demonstrating the feasibility of remote stakeholder involvement, our study presents a robust model for enhancing coexistence, adaptable even where in‐person meetings are challenging. Describing the Status quo of Bison and Moose populations in the German‐Polish border regions, the objective of the study, a simplified workflow through the methods. A graphical depiction of the discussed management scenarios is included, as well as summarized results and recommendations for decision makers.

Monitoring is a prerequisite for evidence‐based wildlife management and conservation planning, yet conventional monitoring approaches are often ineffective for species occurring at low densities. However, some species such as large mammals are often observed by lay people and this information can be leveraged through citizen science monitoring schemes. To ensure that such wildlife monitoring efforts provide robust inferences, assessing the quantity, quality, and potential biases of citizen science data is crucial. For Eurasian moose (Alces alces), a species currently recolonizing north‐eastern Germany and occurring in very low numbers, we applied three citizen science tools: a mail/email report system, a smartphone application, and a webpage. Among these monitoring tools, the mail/email report system yielded the greatest number of moose reports in absolute and in standardized (corrected for time effort) terms. The reported moose were predominantly identified as single, adult, male individuals, and reports occurred mostly during late summer. Overlaying citizen science data with independently generated habitat suitability and connectivity maps showed that members of the public detected moose in suitable habitats but not necessarily in movement corridors. Also, moose detections were often recorded near roads, suggestive of spatial bias in the sampling effort. Our results suggest that citizen science‐based data collection can be facilitated by brief, intuitive digital reporting systems. However, inference from the resulting data can be limited due to unquantified and possibly biased sampling effort. To overcome these challenges, we offer specific recommendations such as more structured monitoring efforts involving the public in areas likely to be roamed by moose for improving quantity, quality, and analysis of citizen science‐based data for making robust inferences. Citizen science‐based monitoring approaches for moose (Alces alces) in northeast Germany have been analyzed and their characteristics and limitations have been assessed. We provide concrete technical and structural changes to overcome data collection biases and improve the quantity and quality of citizen science data.

Successful conservation efforts have led to recent increases of large mammals such as European bison Bison bonasus, moose Alces alces and grey wolf Canis lupus and their return to former habitats in central Europe. While embraced by some, the recovery of these species is a controversial topic and holds potential for human‐wildlife conflicts. Involving the public has been suggested to be an effective method for monitoring wildlife and mitigating associated conflicts. To assess two interrelated prerequisites for engaging people in Citizen Science (CS)—knowledge of returning species and respondents' readiness to participate in CS activities for monitoring and managing these species—we conducted a survey (questionnaire) in two wildlife parks located in different states of Germany. Based on 472 complete questionnaires, we developed generalized linear models to understand how sociodemographic variables and exposure to the species affected visitors' knowledge of each species, and to investigate if sociodemographic variables and knowledge influenced the likelihood of visitors to participate in CS activities. Almost all visitors were aware of the returning wolf population, while knowledge and awareness about bison and moose were significantly lower. Knowledge of the two herbivores differed geographically (higher knowledge of moose in the north‐eastern state), possibly indicating a positive association between exposure to the species and knowledge. However, models generally performed poorly in predicting knowledge about wildlife, suggesting that such specific knowledge is insufficiently explained by sociodemographic variables. Our model, which explained stated willingness in CS indicated that younger participants and those with higher knowledge scores in the survey were more willing to engage in CS activities. Overall, our analyses highlight how exposure to large mammals, knowledge about wildlife and human demographics are interrelated—insights that are helpful for effectively recruiting citizen scientists for wildlife conservation. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Zusammenfassung Aufgrund erfolgreicher Naturschutzmaßnahmen konnten sich Wisent‐ (Bison bonasus), Elch‐ (Alces alces) und Wolfpopulationen (Canis lupus) in Mitteleuropa erholen; mittlerweile sind diese Tierarten in Gebiete zurückgekehrt, in denen sie als ausgestorben galten. Die Rückkehr dieser Tierarten wird kontrovers diskutiert und birgt Potential für Mensch‐Wildtier‐Konflikte. Um die Voraussetzungen für die Einbeziehung von Bürgern (Bürgerwissenschaften) für Monitoring und Management dieser Tierarten zu erkunden, führten wir eine Besucherumfrage in Wildparks in Brandenburg (Wildpark Schorfheide) und Niedersachsen (Wisentgehege Springe) durch. Insbesondere wollten wir herausfinden, inwieweit das Wissen über die rückkehrenden Tierarten und die Teilnahmebereitschaft an bürgerwissenschaftlichen Studien zusammenhängen. Anhand von 472 vollständig ausgefüllten Fragebögen und mittels genereller linearer Modelle prüften wir zuerst die Zusammenhänge zwischen sozio‐demografischen Variablen, Kontakt mit den Tierarten und dem Wissen über die Zielarten. Zudem untersuchten wir, wie Wissenstand und soziodemografische Variablen die Teilnahmebereitschaft für Bürgerwissenschaften beeinflussen. Der Wissensstand der Besucher über den Wolf war generell besser als das Wissen über Wisent und Elch. Das Wissen über die beiden Großherbivoren unterschied sich regional (höherer Wissensstand über Elche in Wildpark Schorfheide). Dies weist darauf hin, dass sich die geografische Nähe zu den Tierarten positiv auf den Wissensstand auswirken kann. Allerdings erklärten die statistischen Modelle die beobachtete Varianz unzureichend, was darauf hindeutet, dass soziodemografische Variablen Fachwissen nur geringfügig erklären können. Das Model zur Teilnahmebereitschaft an bürgerwissenschaftlichen Studien deutet darauf hin, dass jüngere und besser informierte Bürger eher dazu bereit waren, an solchen Studien teilzunehmen. Unsere Analysen zeigen die Wechselwirkungen zwischen Wissensstand, Kontakt zu Wildtieren und sozio‐demografischen Eigenschaften auf. Diese Erkenntnisse können für das Anwerben von Teilnehmern an Bürgerwissenschaftsprojekten genutzt werden. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Since 2012, the citizen science project ‘Mückenatlas’ has been supplementing the German mosquito monitoring programme with over 28,000 submissions of physical insect samples. As the factors triggering people to catch mosquitoes for science are still unknown, we analysed the influence of mass media reports on mosquito submission numbers. Based on a theoretical framework of how mass media affect citizen responsiveness, we identified five possible influencing factors related to citizen science: (i) project awareness and knowledge, (ii) attention (economy), (iii) individual characteristics of citizen scientists and targeted communication, (iv) spatial differences and varying affectedness, and (v) media landscape. Hypotheses based on these influencing factors were quantitatively and qualitatively tested with two datasets: clipping data of mass media reports (online, television, radio and print) referring to or focussing on the ‘Mückenatlas’, and corresponding data of ‘Mückenatlas’ submissions between 2014 and 2017. In general, the number of media reports positively affected the number of mosquito submissions on a temporal and spatial scale, i.e. many media reports provoke many mosquito submissions. We found that an already heightened public and media awareness of mosquito-relevant topics combined with a direct call-to-action in a media report title led to a maximum participation. Differences on federal state level, however, suggest that factors additional to quantitative media coverage trigger participation in the ‘Mückenatlas’, in particular the mosquito affectedness of the resident population. Lastly, media types appear to differ in their effects on the number of submissions. Our results show under which circumstances the media presence of the ’Mückenatlas’ is most effective in activating people to submit mosquito samples, and thus provide advice for designing communication strategies for citizen science projects.

1. While the return of wolves (Canis lupus) to many European countries is a conservation milestone, the negative impacts are unevenly distributed across society, placing high pressure on livestock grazing systems. 2. For this perspective, scientists from diverse disciplines and geographical backgrounds reflect on the state of livestock–wolf interactions in Europe and formulate recommendations for enabling wolf–livestock coexistence. 3. We argue that co-designing, co-implementing and co-disseminating research with key stakeholders, such as livestock farmers, is a productive approach to developing and implementing locally appropriate coexistence strategies. 4. Decision-making should be informed by scientific evidence. We recommend that ecological data on wolves and livestock are collected and shared across borders. Evidence from the social sciences is important for understanding the human dimension of wolf–livestock interactions. 5. We suggest bridging the gaps within multidisciplinary wolf–livestock research to strengthen interdisciplinary insights, comprehensively evaluate management approaches and guide governance and policy decisions that properly account for inherent complexities. 6. Policy implications: As wolf populations and their impacts continue to grow in Europe, policymakers at all levels must make decisions that adequately safeguard wolf populations while simultaneously protecting livestock and livelihoods. This requires access to reliable scientific evidence. adaptive management, Canis lupus, co-implementation, grazing systems, human–wildlife coexistence, interdisciplinary research, science communication, stakeholder engagement

Since 2012, the citizen science project ‘Mückenatlas’ has been supplementing the German mosquito monitoring programme with over 28,000 submissions of physical insect samples. As the factors triggering people to catch mosquitoes for science are still unknown, we analysed the influence of mass media reports on mosquito submission numbers. Based on a theoretical framework of how mass media affect citizen responsiveness, we identified five possible influencing factors related to citizen science: (i) project awareness and knowledge, (ii) attention (economy), (iii) individual characteristics of citizen scientists and targeted communication, (iv) spatial differences and varying affectedness, and (v) media landscape. Hypotheses based on these influencing factors were quantitatively and qualitatively tested with two datasets: clipping data of mass media reports (online, television, radio and print) referring to or focussing on the ‘Mückenatlas’, and corresponding data of ‘Mückenatlas’ submissions between 2014 and 2017. In general, the number of media reports positively affected the number of mosquito submissions on a temporal and spatial scale, i.e. many media reports provoke many mosquito submissions. We found that an already heightened public and media awareness of mosquito-relevant topics combined with a direct call-to-action in a media report title led to a maximum participation. Differences on federal state level, however, suggest that factors additional to quantitative media coverage trigger participation in the ‘Mückenatlas’, in particular the mosquito affectedness of the resident population. Lastly, media types appear to differ in their effects on the number of submissions. Our results show under which circumstances the media presence of the ’Mückenatlas’ is most effective in activating people to submit mosquito samples, and thus provide advice for designing communication strategies for citizen science projects.