Journal of Coastal Conservation

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 585–596 | Cite as

Design solutions to coastal human-wildlife conflicts

  • Meredith Root-BernsteinEmail author
  • Nicolás Arévalo Rosas
  • Layla P. Osman
  • Richard J. Ladle


Coastal areas can be a challenge for conservation due to multiple competing land uses including development, tourism, and extractive resource use. These multiple land uses often lead to human-wildlife conflicts. Here we propose that collaboration with industrial designers and architects has the potential to generate innovative and effective solutions to coastal human-wildlife conflicts. Many products for modifying animal behavior are already used by conservationists, such as barriers, corridors, and model predators. We propose that their effectiveness, quality, harmonization with local values, and integration with the designed human environment can be improved through collaboration with designers and architects. We illustrate this approach with a case study. We engaged in an industrial design- conservation collaboration focused on the design of multiple product proposals that would support a range of human-sea lion interactions in public parks and the fish market in Valdivia, Chile. The sea lions in Valdivia are a tourist attraction but also potentially dangerous. We produced images of seven proposed products of varying scales, facilitating a range of different sea lion- human interactions. Such collaborations can be useful for developing products that reduce human-wildlife conflicts and align conservation and management with local values. We urge researchers to publish conservation design proposals as well as tests of existing conservation products’ functionality, in order to improve conservation design practice around the world.


Sea lion Conservation design Tourism Coastal conservation Coastal management 



Many thanks to Juan Armesto and José Molina for their support at different stages of this project.


  1. Blumstein DT, Fernández-Juricic E (2004) The emergence of conservation behavior. Cons Biol 18:1175–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breitenmoser U, Angst C, Landry J-M, Breitenmoser-Würsten C, Linnell JDC, Weber J-M (2005) Non-lethal techniques for reducing depredation. In: Woodroffe R, Thirgood S, Rabinowitz A (eds) People and wildlife: conflict or coexistence? Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Brenner J, Jiménez JA, Sardá R, & Garola A (2010) An assessment of the non-market value of the ecosystem services provided by the Catalan coastal zone, Spain. Ocean & Coastal Manag 53:27–38Google Scholar
  4. Buchholz R (2007) Behavioral biology: an effective and relevant conservation tool. TREE 22:401–406Google Scholar
  5. Burton RJF, Kuczera C, & Schwartz G (2008) Exploring farmers’s cultural resistance to voluntary agri-environmental schemes. Sociol. Ruralis 48(1):16–37Google Scholar
  6. Campbell B (2005) Changing protection policies and ethnographies of environmental engagement. Cons & Soc 3(2):280–322Google Scholar
  7. Carpenter SR, Pingali PL, Bennett EM, Zurek MB (eds) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: scenarios, vol 2. Island, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. Dawkins MS (2006) A user’s guide to animal welfare. TREE 21:77–82Google Scholar
  9. Dawson SM, Read A, Slooten E (1998) Pingers, porpoises and power: uncertainties with using pingers to reduce bycatch of small cetaceans. Biol Cons 84:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Day TD, MacGibbon RJ (2002) Escape behavior and physical abilities of vertebrate pests towards electrified and non-electrified fences. Internal report. Xcluder Pest Proof Fencing, Rotorua, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  11. Galhano-Alves JP (2004) Man and wild boar: a study in Montesinho Natural Park, Portugal. Galemys 16:223–230Google Scholar
  12. Griebel U, & Peichl L (2003) Colour vision in aquatic mammals--facts and open questions. Aqu. Mamm. 29(1):18–30Google Scholar
  13. Griffin AS, Blumstein DT, Evans CS (2000) Review: training captive-bred or translocated animals to avoid predators. Cons Biol 14:1317–1326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ham SH (1992) Environmental interpretation a practical guide for people with big ideas and small budgets. Fulcrum/North American Press, GoldenGoogle Scholar
  15. Ham SH (2002) Cognitive Psychology and Interpretation. Chapter 16 In: Hooper-Greenhill E (ed), The Educational Role of the Museum (2nd edition). London: Routledge, pp 161–171Google Scholar
  16. Hilty JA, Lidicker WZ Jr, Merenlender AM (2006) Corridor ecology: the science and practice of linking landscapes for biodiversity conservation. Island, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Linnel JDC, Nilsen EB, Lande US, Herfindal I, Odden J, Skogen K, Andersen R, Breitenmoser U (2005) Zoning as a means of mitigating conflicts with large carnivores: principles and reality. In: Woodroffe R, Thirgood S, Rabinowitz A (eds) People and wildlife: conflict or coexistence? Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Morris D (1990) Animalwatching: a field guide to animal behavior. Jonathan Cape, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Obreque R (2006) Valdivia: Encuentran solución para contener “invasión” de lobos marinos en La Costanera. El Mercurio Online, 27 October 2006. Accessed February 2010
  20. Orsini J-P, Shaughnessy PD, Newsome D (2006) Impacts of human visitors on Australian Sea Lions (Neophoca cinerea) at Carnac Island, Western Australia: implications for tourism management. Tourism Mar Environ 3(2):101–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Osman LP, Cardyn S, Díaz P (2009) Comportamiento del lobo marino común (Otaria flavescens) en el río Valdivia. Technical report, Ilustre Municipalidad de ValdiviaGoogle Scholar
  22. Root-Bernstein M (2008) Stimulating interdisciplinarity and innovation in design solutions for wildlife conservation. MSc thesis, Oxford University, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  23. Root-Bernstein M, Ladle R (2010) Conservation by design. Conserv Biol 24(5):1205–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosenzweig ML (2003) Win-win ecology: How the Earth’s species can survive in the midst of human enterprise. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  25. Sepúlveda M, Pérez MJ, Sielfeld W, Oliva D, Durán LR, Rodríguez L, Araos V, Buscaglia M (2007) Operational interaction between South American sea lions Otaria flavescens and artisanal (small-scale) fishing in Chile: results from interview surveys and on-board observations. Fish Res 83:332–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shivik JA, Treves A, Callahan P (2003) Nonlethal techniques for managing predation: primary and secondary repelents. Cons Biol 17(6):1531–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Skewgar E, Simeone A, Boersma PD (2009) Marine Reserve in Chile would benefit penguins and ecotourism. Ocean & Coastal Manag 52:487–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stappers PJ, Hummels C (2006) Form confusion in public spaces, or: how to lie with affordances. In: Feijs L, Kyffin S, Young B (eds) Design and semantics of form and movement. Koninklijke Philips Electronics, Eindhoven, pp 104–108Google Scholar
  29. Stevens MA, Boness DJ (2003) Influences of habitat features and human disturbance on use of breeding sites by a declining population of southern fur seals (Arctocephalus australis). J Zool Lond 260:145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thompson CF, Neill AJ (1991) House wrens do not prefer clean nest boxes. Anim Behav 42:1022–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Timberlake W (1997) An animal-centered, causal-system approach to the understanding and control of behavior. Appl Anim Behav Sci 53:107–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Túnez JI, Cappozzo HL, Cassini MH (2008) Natural and anthropogenic factors associated with the distribution of South American sea lion along the Atlantic coast. Hydrobiologia 598:191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weinstein MP, Reed DJ (2005) Sustainable coastal development: the dual mandate and a recommendation for “Commerce Managed Areas”. Rest Ecol 13(1):174–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Werner TB, Pinto LP, Dutra GF, Pereira PGDP (2010) Abrolhos 2000: Conserving the Southern Atlantic’s richest coastal biodiversity into the next century. Coastal Manag 28(1):99–108Google Scholar
  35. Woodroffe R, Thirgood S, & Rabinowitz A, eds. (2005). People and wildlife: Conflict or coexistence? Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Zeisel J (2006) Inquiry by design: Environment/ behaviour/ neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape and planning. W.W. Norton and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meredith Root-Bernstein
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nicolás Arévalo Rosas
    • 2
  • Layla P. Osman
    • 3
  • Richard J. Ladle
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of EcologyPontifícia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  2. 2.School of Architecture and DesignPontifícia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Instituto de Ecología y EvoluciónUniversidad Austral de ChileValdiviaChile
  4. 4.School of Geography and the EnvironmentOxford UniversityOxfordUK
  5. 5.Department of Agricultural and Environmental EngineeringUniversidade Federal de ViçosaViçosaBrazil

Personalised recommendations