, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 131–138 | Cite as

Reconciling farming and wild nature: Integrating human–wildlife coexistence into the land-sharing and land-sparing framework

  • Silvio J. CrespinEmail author
  • Javier A. Simonetti


Land has traditionally been spared to protect biodiversity; however, this approach has not succeeded by itself and requires a complementary strategy in human-dominated landscapes: land-sharing. Human–wildlife conflicts are rampant in a land-sharing context where wildlife co-occur with crops or livestock, but whose resulting interactions adversely affect the wellbeing of land owners, ultimately impeding coexistence. Therefore, true land-sharing only works if coexistence is also considered an end goal. We reviewed the literature on land-sharing and found that conflicts have not yet found their way into the land-sharing/sparing framework, with wildlife and humans co-occurring without coexisting in a dynamic process. To successfully implement a land-sharing approach, we must first acknowledge our failure to integrate the body of work on human–wildlife conflicts into the framework and work to implement multidisciplinary approaches from the ecological, economic, and sociological sciences to overcome and prevent conflicts. We suggest the use of Conflict Transformation by means of the Levels of Conflict Model to perceive both visible and deep-rooted causes of conflicts as opportunities to create problem-solving dynamics in affected socio-ecological landscapes. Reconciling farming and nature is possible by aiming for a transition to landscapes that truly share space by virtue of coexistence.


Coexistence Conflict reconciliation Conflict resolution Human-dominated landscapes Land-sharing Wildlife-friendly farming 



SJC is a fellow of the Chilean Comisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (CONICYT 63130184). We are grateful to three anonymous referees, whose helpful comments contributed towards enhancing the quality of the final manuscript. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

13280_2018_1059_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (34 kb)
Supporting Information A list of the studies subjected to review is provided as Table S1 and are available online. The authors are solely responsible for the content and functionality of these materials. Queries (other than absence of the material) should be directed to the corresponding author. Supplementary material 1 (XLSX 34 kb)


  1. Baker, P.J., L. Boitani, S. Harris, G. Saunders, and P.C.L. White. 2008. Terrestrial carnivores and human food production: Impact and management. Mammal Review 38: 123–166. Scholar
  2. Balmford, A., R. Green, and B. Phalan. 2015. Land for food & land for nature? Daedalus 144: 57–75. Scholar
  3. Barua, M., S.A. Bhagwat, and S. Jadhav. 2013. The hidden dimensions of human–wildlife conflict: Health impacts, opportunity and transaction costs. Biological Conservation 157: 309–316. Scholar
  4. Baudron, F., and K.E. Giller. 2014. Agriculture and nature: Trouble and strife? Biological Conservation 170: 232–245. Scholar
  5. Bouyer, Y., V. Gervasi, P. Poncin, R.C. Beudels-Jamar, J. Odden, and J.D.C. Linnell. 2015. Tolerance to anthropogenic disturbance by a large carnivore: The case of Eurasian lynx in south-eastern Norway. Animal Conservation 18: 271–278. Scholar
  6. Butchart, S.H.M., M. Walpole, B. Collen, A. van Strien, J.P.W. Scharlemann, R.E.A. Almond, J.E.M. Baillie, B. Bomhard, et al. 2010. Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines. Science 328: 1164–1168. Scholar
  7. Canadian Institute for Conflict Resolution. 2000. Becoming a Third-Party Neutral: Resource Guide. Ridgewood Foundation for Community-Based Conflict Resolution (Int’l).Google Scholar
  8. Chapron, G., and J.V. López-Bao. 2016. Coexistence with large carnivores informed by community ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 31: 578–580. Scholar
  9. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2010. Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi targets. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal. Retrieved January 2018 from
  10. Crespin, S.J., and J.E. García-Villalta. 2014. Integration of land-sharing and land-sparing conservation strategies through regional networking: The Mesoamerican Biological Corridor as a lifeline for carnivores in El Salvador. Ambio 43: 820–824. Scholar
  11. DeFries, R., A. Hansen, A. Newton, and M. Hansen. 2005. Increasing isolation of protected areas in tropical forests over the past twenty years. Ecological Applications 15: 19–26. Scholar
  12. Dickman, A.J. 2010. Complexities of conflict: The importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human–wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation 13: 458–466. Scholar
  13. Dickman, A.J., E.A. Macdonald, and D.W. Macdonald. 2011. A review of financial instruments to pay for predator conservation and encourage human–carnivore coexistence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108: 13937–13944. Scholar
  14. Di Minin, E., and T. Toivonen. 2015. Global protected area expansion: Creating more than paper parks. BioScience 65: 637–638. Scholar
  15. Dorresteijn, I., A.I. Milcu, J. Leventon, J. Hanspach, and J. Fischer. 2016. Social factors mediating human–carnivore coexistence: Understanding thematic strands influencing coexistence in Central Romania. Ambio 45: 490–500. Scholar
  16. Fischer, J., B. Brosi, G.C. Daily, P.R. Ehrlich, R. Goldman, J. Goldstein, D.B. Lindenmayer, A.D. Manning, et al. 2008. Should agricultural policies encourage land sparing or wildlife-friendly farming? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6: 380–385. Scholar
  17. Fischer, J., D.J. Abson, A. Bergsten, N.F. Collier, I. Dorresteijn, J. Hanspach, K. Hylander, J. Schultner, et al. 2017. Reframing the food-biodiversity challenge. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 32: 335–345. Scholar
  18. Graham, K., A.P. Beckerman, and S. Thirgood. 2005. Human–predator–prey conflicts: Ecological correlates, prey losses and patterns of management. Biological Conservation 122: 159–171. Scholar
  19. Goulart, F.F., S. Carvalho-Ribeiro, and B. Soares-Filho. 2016. Farming-biodiversity segregation or integration? Revisiting land-sparing versus land-sharing debate. Journal of Environmental Protection 7: 1016–1032. Scholar
  20. Green, R.E., S.J. Cornell, J.P.W. Scharleman, and A. Balmford. 2005. Farming and the fate of wild nature. Science 307: 550–555. Scholar
  21. Hanley, N., B. Shogren, and J.F. White. 2007. Environmental economics in theory and practice, 2nd ed, 464. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Hanley, N. 2015. Understanding conservation conflicts: An economic perspective. In Conflicts in conservation, ed. S.M. Redpath, R.J. Gutierréz, K.A. Wood, and J.C. Young, 79–93. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243–1248. Scholar
  24. Hulme, M.F., J.A. Vickery, R.E. Green, B. Phalan, D.E. Chamberlain, D.E. Pomeroy, D. Nalwanga, D. Mushabe, et al. 2013. Conserving the birds of Uganda’s banana-coffee arc: Land sparing and land sharing compared. PLoS ONE 8: e54597. Scholar
  25. Jack, B.K., C. Kousky, and K.R.E. Sims. 2008. Designing payments for ecosystem services: Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 9465–9470. Scholar
  26. Jiren, T.S., I. Dorresteijn, J. Schultner, and J. Fischer. 2017. The governance of land use strategies: Institutional and social dimensions of land sparing and land sharing. Conservation Letters. Scholar
  27. Law, E.A., and K.A. Wilson. 2015. Providing context for the land-sharing and land-sparing debate. Conservation Letters 5: 404–413. Scholar
  28. Lederach, J.P. 2003. Little book of Conflict Transformation. Good Books.Google Scholar
  29. Lerner, A.M., A.F. Zuluaga, J. Chará, A. Etter, and T. Searchinger. 2017. Sustainable cattle ranching in practice: Moving from theory to planning in Colombia’s livestock sector. Environmental Management 60: 1–9. Scholar
  30. Madden, F. 2004. Creating coexistence between humans and wildlife: Global perspectives on local efforts to address human–wildlife conflict. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 247–257. Scholar
  31. Madden, F., and B. McQuinn. 2014. Conservation’s blind spot: The case for conflict transformation in wildlife conservation. Biological Conservation 178: 97–106. Scholar
  32. Mattison, E.H.A., and K. Norris. 2005. Bridging the gaps between agricultural policy, land-use and biodiversity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 610–616. Scholar
  33. McDonald, J.A., K.J. Helmstedt, M. Bode, S. Coutts, E. McDonald-Madden, and H.P. Possingham. 2018. Improving private land conservation with outcome-based biodiversity payments. Journal of Applied Ecology 55: 1476–1485. Scholar
  34. Mora, C., and P.F. Sale. 2011. Ongoing global biodiversity loss and the need to move beyond protected areas: A review of the technical and practical shortcomings of protected areas on land and sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 434: 251–266. Scholar
  35. Naughton-Treves, L., R. Grossberg, and A. Treves. 2003. Paying for tolerance: Rural citizen’s attitudes toward wolf depredation and compensation. Conservation Biology 17: 1500–1511. Scholar
  36. Oriol-Cotterill, A., M. Valeix, L.G. Frank, C. Riginos, and D.W. MacDonald. 2015. Landscapes of coexistence for terrestrial carnivores: The ecological consequences of being downgraded from ultimate to penultimate predator by humans. Oikos 124: 1263–1273. Scholar
  37. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Patterson, B.D., S.M. Kasiki, E. Selempo, and R.W. Kays. 2004. Livestock predation by lions (Panthera leo) and other carnivores on ranches neighboring Tsavo National ParkS, Kenya. Biological Conservation 119: 507–516. Scholar
  39. Phalan, B., M. Onial, A. Balmford, and R.E. Green. 2011. Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: Land sharing and land sparing compared. Science 333: 1289–1291. Scholar
  40. Rao, K.S., R.K. Maikhuri, S. Nautiuyal, and K.G. Saxena. 2002. Crop damage and livestock depredation by wildlife: A case study from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, India. Journal of Environmental Management 66: 317–327. Scholar
  41. Redford, K.H., and J.G. Robinson. 1991. Park size and the conservation of forest mammals in Latin America. In Latin American mammalogy: History, diversity, and conservation, ed. M.A. Mares, and D.J. Schimdly, 227–234. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  42. Sala, O.E., F.S. Chapin, J.J. Armesto, E. Berlow, J. Bloomfield, R. DIrzo, E. Huber-Sanwald, L.F. Huenneke, et al. 2000. Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287: 1770–1774. Scholar
  43. Shackleford, G.E., P.R. Steward, R.N. German, S.M. Sait, and T.G. Benton. 2015. Conservation planning in agricultural landscapes: Hotspots of conflict between agriculture and nature. Diversity and Distributions 21: 357–367. Scholar
  44. Venter, O., R.A. Fuller, D.B. Segan, J. Carwardine, T. Brooks, S.H.M. Butchart, M. Di Marco, T. Iwamura, et al. 2014. Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity. PLoS Biology 12: e1001891. Scholar
  45. Wang, S.W., and D.W. Macdonald. 2006. Livestock predation by carnivores in Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. Biological Conservation 129: 558–565. Scholar
  46. Woodroffe, R., and J. Ginsberg. 1998. Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science 280: 2126–2128. Scholar
  47. Woodroffe, R., S. Thirgood, and A. Rabinowitz. 2005. The impact of human–wildlife conflict on natural systems. In People and wildlife: Conflict or coexistence, ed. R. Woodroffe, S. Thirgood, and A. Rabinowitz, 1–12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Young, J.C., M. Marzano, R.M. White, D.I. McCracken, S.M. Redpath, D.N. Carss, C.P. Quine, and A.D. Watt. 2010. The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: Characteristics and management strategies. Biodiversity and Conservation 19: 3973–3990. Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas, Facultad de CienciasUniversidad de ChileÑuñoaChile
  2. 2.Asociación KauyekenSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Instituto de Investigaciones Tropicales de El SalvadorSan SalvadorEl Salvador

Personalised recommendations