The ecology and predator–prey dynamics of large felids in the tropics have largely been studied in natural systems where wild ungulates constitute the majority of the prey base. However, human-dominated landscapes can be rich in potential prey for large carnivores because of the high density of domestic animals, especially in tropical countries where pastoralism is an important livelihood activity. We report the almost complete dependence of leopards Panthera pardus on domestic animals as prey in the crop lands of Ahmednagar district, Maharashtra, India. From analysis of 85 confirmed leopard scats, 87% of the leopard's prey biomass consisted of domestic animals, with 39% consisting of domestic dogs Canis lupus familiaris alone. The only wild species that occurred in the leopard's diet were rodents, small indian civet Viverricula indica, bonnet macaque Macaca radiata and other primates Semnopithecus spp., mongoose Herpestes spp., and birds. Interviews conducted in 77 households distributed randomly in the study area documented a high density of domestic animals: adult cattle Bos taurus, calves, goats Capra aegagrus, dogs and cats Felis catus occurred at densities of 169, 54, 174, 24 and 61 per km2, respectively. Ivlev's electivity index indicated that dogs and cats were over-represented in the leopard's diet, given the higher densities of goats and cattle. The standing biomass of dogs and cats alone was sufficient to sustain the high density of carnivores at the study site. Our results show that the abundance of potential domestic prey biomass present in human-use areas supports a relatively high density of predators, although this interaction could result in conflict with humans.

Where people and livestock live with predators there is often conflict that can lead to lethal control of predators. We evaluated attitudes of local people towards large predators and developed a novel index of tolerance by quantifying the number of livestock respondents would be willing to lose before killing the predator responsible. We interviewed 416 subsistence livestock farmers (community members) and commercial livestock ranchers in central Kenya. Commercial ranchers had more positive attitudes and higher tolerance than community members. Community members said their tolerance would increase if they were to derive income from ecotourism or trophy hunting. We found that community members with land title deeds were most tolerant of predators, stressing the importance of land security for conservation efforts. Subsistence livestock farming is the primary land use throughout much of Africa and, as a result, identifying strategies to improve tolerance of predators under this land tenure system is of major conservation significance.

In situ conservation is central to contemporary global biodiversity protection and is the predominant emphasis of international regulation and funding strategies. Ex situ approaches, in contrast, have been relegated to a subsidiary role and their direct contributions to conservation have been limited. We draw on a variety of sources to make the case for an enhanced role for ex situ conservation. We note the advances occurring within institutions specializing in ex situ conservation and stress that, although much remains to be done, many constraints are being addressed. We argue that the evidence of increasing extinction rates, exacerbated by climate change, challenges the wisdom of a heavy dependence on in situ strategies and necessitates increased development of ex situ approaches. A number of different techniques that enable species and their habitats to survive should now be explored. These could build on the experience of management systems that have already demonstrated the effective integration of in situ and ex situ techniques and hybrid approaches. For organizations specializing in ex situ conservation to become more effective, however, they will require tangible support from the institutions of global biodiversity governance. Resistance is anticipated because in situ conservation is entrenched through powerful groups and organizations that exert influence on global conservation policy and facilitate the flow of funding. The chasm that has traditionally divided in situ and ex situ approaches may diminish as approaches are combined. Moreover, the relentless loss of the ‘wild’ may soon render the in situ / ex situ distinction misleading, or even obsolete.

Conflicts with human interests have reappeared following recovery of large carnivores in Europe. Public acceptance is higher than historically but there is a need to identify effective, acceptable techniques to facilitate coexistence. We present a case study of predation on livestock in Slovakia. Damage, mitigation measures and public opinion were assessed using compensation records, analysis of farm conditions, questionnaire surveys, semi-structured interviews, diet analysis and on-farm trials of livestock-guarding dogs. Economic damage was inconsequential on a national scale but high locally: c. 80% of reported losses occurred at 12% of sheep flocks. Grey wolves Canis lupus were held responsible for four to six times more damage than brown bears Ursus arctos, although livestock occurred in only 2 of 78 wolf faeces during spring–autumn, when sheep and cattle were most vulnerable. Losses to Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx were negligible. Compared to other sectors of society shepherds had the most negative attitudes, particularly towards wolves, despite compensation payments. Appropriate use of livestock-guarding dogs was associated with fewer losses: median loss at trial flocks with predation was 70% lower than at control flocks. We conclude that identifying vulnerable farms and targeting them for mitigation could reduce damage, although lack of motivation and awareness are obstacles. This study shows that damage levels need not be excessive despite high predator densities in human-dominated landscapes. Conflicts were unevenly distributed, with much of the variation explained by local conditions and husbandry practices, especially preventive measures. Livestock-guarding dogs are particularly appropriate where wolves are present in proximity to unfenced pastures.

The global protected area estate is the world’s largest ever planned land use. Protected areas are not monolithic and vary in their purpose, designation, management and outcomes. The IUCN protected area category system is a typology based on management objectives. It documents protected area types and is increasingly used in laws, policy and planning. As its role grows, the category system must be reactive to opinions and open to modifications. In response to requests from members IUCN undertook a 4-year consultation and recently published revised guidelines for the categories. These made subtle but important changes to the protected area definition, giving greater emphasis to nature conservation, protection over the long term and management effectiveness. It refined some categories and gave principles for application. Debates during revision were intense and highlighted many of the issues and challenges surrounding protected areas in the early 21st century. There was a consensus on many issues including the suitability of different governance models (such as indigenous and community conserved areas), sacred natural sites, moving the emphasis of Category IV from habitat manipulation towards species and habitat protection, and recognition of legally defined zones within a protected area as different categories. However, there was considerable disagreement about the definition of a protected area, the appropriateness of some categories with extensive human use, the possibility of linking category classification with biodiversity outcomes, and recognition of territories of indigenous peoples. We map these debates and propose actions to resolve these issues: a necessary step if the world’s protected area network is to be representative, secure and well managed.

The Nature Conservancy takes a strategic and systematic approach to conservation planning. Ecoregional assessments are used to set goals and identify geographical priorities, and Conservation Action Planning is used to develop strategic plans for conservation areas. This study demonstrates how these planning processes were applied at the seascape scale based on a case study of Kimbe Bay, Papua New Guinea. Conservation Action Planning was used to identify key threats and strategies, and systematic conservation planning (similar to that used for ecoregional assessments) was used to design a network of marine protected areas to be resilient to the threat of climate change. The design was based on an assessment of biodiversity and socio-economic values, and identified 14 Areas of Interest that meet specific conservation goals. A detailed community-based planning process is now underway with local communities that own and manage these areas to refine and implement the marine protected area network.

A study to describe the diversity of wild felids was carried out in Jerangau Forest Reserve, Ulu Terengganu, Malaysia, using camera traps, over a period of 21 months. A total of 24 camera traps were used, with a total of 5,972 trap days. Six species of wild cats in five genera were recorded: tiger Panthera tigris, leopard Panthera pardus, clouded leopard Neofelis nebulosa, leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis, golden cat Catopuma temminckii and marbled cat Pardofelis marmorata. This represents all but two of the felid species known to occur in Peninsular Malaysia. The use of camera traps provided detailed information on the occurrence and activity patterns of these relatively secretive mammals. The most frequently photographed species was tiger (38.5% of records) followed by leopard (26.3%) and leopard cat (21.9%). The presence of charismatic flagship species such as tiger in this unprotected lowland dipterocarp secondary forest will be of help to local conservation organizations and the Wildlife Department in any proposals for the protection of these areas.

In 1985 many African elephant populations, which had been monitored for a decade or more, were either in rapid decline or down to a fraction of their former size. The author examines regional trends and information on key populations with reference to the critical factors affecting the survival of the African elephant, most significantly poaching and the illegal trade in ivory

Over the past 15 years the Tanzanian government has promoted participatory forest management (both joint forest management and community-based forest management) as a major strategy for managing natural forests for sustainable use and conservation. Such management is currently either operational or in the process of being established in > 3.6 million ha of forest land and in > 1,800 villages. Data from three case studies of forests managed using participatory and non-participatory forest management approaches suggest that community involvement in forest management is correlated with improving forest condition. In our first case study we demonstrate increasing basal area and volume of trees per ha over time in miombo woodland and coastal forest habitats under participatory forest management compared with similar forests under state or open access management. In our second case study three coastal forest and sub-montane Eastern Arc forests under participatory forest management show a greater number of trees per ha, and mean height and diameter of trees compared to three otherwise similar forests under state management. In our third case study levels of cutting in coastal forest and Eastern Arc forests declined over time since initiation in participatory forest management sites. We conclude that participatory forest management is showing signs of delivering impact in terms of improved forest condition in Tanzanian forests but that further assessments need to be made to verify these initial findings.

Over the past decade conservation groups have put considerable effort into educating consumers and changing patterns of household consumption. Many groups aiming to reduce overfishing and encourage sustainable fishing practices have turned to new market-based tools, including consumer awareness campaigns and seafood certification schemes (e.g. the Marine Stewardship Council) that have been well received by the fishing and fish marketing industries and by the public in many western countries. Here, we review difficulties that may impede further progress, such as consumer confusion, lack of traceability and a lack of demonstrably improved conservation status for the fish that are meant to be protected. Despite these issues, market-based initiatives may have a place in fisheries conservation in raising awareness among consumers and in encouraging suppliers to adopt better practices. We also present several additional avenues for market-based conservation measures that may strengthen or complement current initiatives, such as working higher in the demand chain, connecting seafood security to climate change via life cycle analysis, diverting small fish away from the fishmeal industry into human food markets, and the elimination of fisheries subsidies. Finally, as was done with greenhouse gas emissions, scientists, conservation groups and governments should set seafood consumption targets.

Bird-keeping is an extremely popular pastime in Indonesia, where there is a thriving internal market in both wild-caught and captive-bred birds. However, little is known about whether the scale of bird-keeping represents a genuine conservation threat to native populations. Here we present the results of the largest ever survey of bird-keeping among households in Indonesia's five major cities. Birds were found to be urban Indonesia's most popular pet (kept by 21.8% of survey households) and we conservatively estimate that as many as 2.6 million birds are kept in the five cities sampled. Of bird-keeping households, 78.5% kept domestic species and/or commercially bred species and 60.2% kept wild-caught birds that we classified into three conservation categories: native songbirds, native parrots and imported songbirds. Compared to non-bird owners, households keeping wild-caught birds in all three conservation categories were richer and better educated, whereas households owning commercially-bred species were richer but not better educated and households keeping domestic species did not differ in educational or socio-economic status. We conclude that bird-keeping in Indonesia is at a scale that warrants a conservation intervention and that promoting commercially-bred alternatives may be an effective and popular solution.

A major problem in establishing effective protocols for conserving Madagascar's biodiversity is the lack of reliable information for the identification of priority sites in need of protection. Analyses of field data and information from herbarium collections for members of the plant family Pandanaceae (85 spp. of Pandanus; 6 spp. of Martellidendron) showed how risk of extinction assessments can inform conservation planning. Application of IUCN Red List categories and criteria showed that 91% of the species are threatened. Mapping occurrence revealed centres of richness and rarity as well as gaps in Madagascar's existing protected area network. Protection of 10 additional sites would be required to encompass the 19 species currently lacking representation in the reserve network, within which east coast littoral forests are particularly under represented and important. The effect of scale on assessments of risk of extinction was explored by applying different grid cell sizes to estimate area of occupancy. Using a grid cell size within the range suggested by IUCN overestimates threatened status if based solely upon specimen data. For poorly inventoried countries such as Madagascar measures of range size based on such data should be complemented with field observations to determine population size, sensitivity to disturbance, and specific threats to habitat and therefore potential population decline. The analysis of such data can make an important contribution to the conservation planning process by identifying threatened species and revealing the highest priority sites for their conservation.

In recognition of the fact that orang-utans (Pongo spp.) are severely threatened, a meeting of orang-utan experts and conservationists, representatives of national and regional governmental and non-governmental organizations, and other stakeholders, was convened in Jakarta, Indonesia, in January 2004. Prior to this meeting we surveyed all large areas for which orang-utan population status was unknown. Compilation of all survey data produced a comprehensive picture of orang-utan distribution on both Borneo and Sumatra. These results indicate that in 2004 there were c. 6,500 P. abelii remaining on Sumatra and at least 54,000 P. pygmaeus on Borneo. Extrapolating to 2008 on the basis of forest loss on both islands suggests the estimate for Borneo could be 10% too high but that for Sumatra is probably still relatively accurate because forest loss in orang-utan habitat has been low during the conflict in Aceh, where most P. abelii occur. When those population sizes are compared to known historical sizes it is clear that the Sumatran orang-utan is in rapid decline, and unless extraordinary efforts are made soon, it could become the first great ape species to go extinct. In contrast, our results indicate there are more and larger populations of Bornean orang-utans than previously known. Although these revised estimates for Borneo are encouraging, forest loss and associated loss of orang-utans are occurring at an alarming rate, and suggest that recent reductions of Bornean orang-utan populations have been far more severe than previously supposed. Nevertheless, although orang-utans on both islands are under threat, we highlight some reasons for cautious optimism for their long-term conservation.

Proponents of community conservation present it as a means of reconciling conservation and development objectives by ensuring that the interests of local people are taken into account in making trade-offs. Conservation critics see it as a challenge to the state-led, scientific management that is necessary to guarantee the preservation of biodiversity. In this paper, we argue that community conservation is not one thing but many. It is evolving both as a concept and as a practice that must be built on. It is not a project or policy ‘choice’ that can be simply accepted or rejected. The key questions about community conservation are who should set the objectives for conservation policy on the ground and how should trade-offs between the diverse objectives of different interests be negotiated.

Despite the considerable expansion in the number and extent of marine protected areas during the past century, coverage remains limited amid concerns that many marine protected areas are failing to meet their objectives. New estimates of global marine protected area, based on the database maintained by Sea Around Us, revealed a degree of progress towards protecting at least 10% of the global ocean by 2020. It is estimated that > 6,000 marine protected areas, covering c. 3.27% (12 million km2) of the oceans, had been designated by the end of 2013. However, protection is generally weak, with c. one-sixth (1.9 million km2) of the combined area designated as no-take areas (i.e. fishing and other extractive activities are prohibited). Additional large tracts of ocean will need to be protected to reach the 10% target, and we investigate hypothetical scenarios for such expansion. Such scenarios offer a one-dimensional measure of progress as they do not address aspects of other global targets, such as Aichi Target 11, which will help to ensure that marine protected areas meet their objectives and achieve conservation outcomes.

Anyone who has ever kept orang-utans would agree that they are the most lovable and fascinating of animals. Their sad expressions and reserved ways give them a depth of character rare outside our own species. Man's interest in them has been great for hundreds of years and cave deposits from Sarawak show that our ancestors of thirty thousand years ago shared this interest. Yet the orang-utan or ‘man of the woods’ has now become the rarest, most threatened and least understood of all the apes.

Crop raiding by elephants is the most prevalent form of human–elephant conflict and can result in devastating economic losses for farmers, loss of human lives and the killing or capture of elephants. Chilli (capsaicin)-based elephant deterrents have been promoted as tools for reducing such conflict but have been little tested. From October 2005 to April 2006 we tested crop-guarding systems around Way Kambas National Park in Indonesia. We evaluated the effectiveness of community-based guarding using traditional tools (e.g. noise-makers) at one site and community-based guarding plus chilli-grease-covered fences and tripwire-triggered sirens at another site. We monitored human–elephant conflict rates around the Park to assess the effectiveness of our mitigation trials. Over the trial period there were 34 attempts by elephants to enter crop fields at the chilli and sirens site and 57 attempts to enter fields at the conventional site but 91.2% of attempts were repelled successfully at both sites. Over the same period there were 401 crop-raiding incidents elsewhere around the Park. In 2007 farmers at both our former sites voluntarily adopted the methods that had been used at the conventional site, but not at the chilli and sirens site, and were able to repel 156 of 178 (87.6%) attempted elephant raids. We conclude that community-based guarding using conventional tools is the key to keeping elephants out of crops and that chilli-grease fences (and sirens) do not add any significant deterrent effect but do add expense and create additional work. However, other chilli-based deterrents may be effective and chillies have value as elephant-resistant cash crops.

The mitigation hierarchy is a decision-making framework designed to address impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services through first seeking to avoid impacts wherever possible, then minimizing or restoring impacts, and finally by offsetting any unavoidable impacts. Avoiding impacts is seen by many as the most certain and effective way of managing harm to biodiversity, and its position as the first stage of the mitigation hierarchy indicates that it should be prioritized ahead of other stages. However, despite an abundance of legislative and voluntary requirements, there is often a failure to avoid impacts. We discuss reasons for this failure and outline some possible solutions. We highlight the key roles that can be played by conservation organizations in cultivating political will, holding decision makers accountable to the law, improving the processes of impact assessment and avoidance, building capacity, and providing technical knowledge. A renewed focus on impact avoidance as the foundation of the mitigation hierarchy could help to limit the impacts on biodiversity of large-scale developments in energy, infrastructure, agriculture and other sectors.

Humans have lived alongside and interacted with wild animals throughout evolutionary history. Even though wild animals can damage property, or injure humans and domesticated animals, not all interactions between humans and wildlife are negative. Yet, research has tended to focus disproportionately on negative interactions leading to negative outcomes, labelling this human–wildlife conflict. Studies have identified several factors, ranging from gender, religion, socio-economics and literacy, which influence people's responses to wildlife. We used the ISI Web of Knowledge database to assess quantitatively how human–wildlife interactions are framed in the scientific literature and to understand the hypotheses that have been invoked to explain these. We found that the predominant focus of research was on human–wildlife conflict (71%), with little coverage of coexistence (2%) or neutral interactions (8%). We suggest that such a framing is problematic as it can lead to biases in conservation planning by failing to consider the nuances of people's relationships with wildlife and the opportunities that exist for conservation. We propose a typology of human responses to wildlife impacts, ranging from negative to positive, to help moderate the disproportionate focus on conflict. We suggest that standardizing terminology and considering interactions beyond those that are negative can lead to a more nuanced understanding of human–wildlife relations and help promote greater coexistence between people and wildlife. We also list the various influential factors that are reported to shape human–wildlife interactions and, to generate further hypotheses and research, classify them into 55 proximate (correlates) and five ultimate (mechanisms) factors.

Human–wildlife conflicts are common across Africa. In Mozambique, official records show that wildlife killed 265 people during 27 months (July 2006 to September 2008). Crocodile Crocodylus niloticus, lion Panthera leo, elephant Loxodonta africana and hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius caused most deaths but crocodiles were responsible for 66%. Crocodile attacks occurred across Mozambique but 53% of deaths occurred in districts bordering Lake Cabora Bassa and the Zambezi River. Hippopotamus attacks were also concentrated here. Lion attacks occurred mainly in northern Mozambique and, while people were attacked by elephants across the country, 67% of deaths occurred in northern Mozambique. Attacks by lions, elephants or hippopotamuses were relatively rare but additional data will probably show that attacks by these species are more widespread than the preliminary records suggest. Buffalo Syncerus caffer, hyaena Crocuta crocuta and leopard Panthera pardus were minor conflict species. Good land-use planning, a long-term solution to many conflicts, is particularly relevant in Mozambique, where the crocodile and hippopotamus populations of protected areas are often in rivers that border these areas, and cause conflicts outside them, and where people commonly live within protected areas. Poverty may prompt fishermen to risk crocodile attack by entering rivers or lakes. The high incidence of conflicts near Limpopo and South Africa’s Kruger National Parks (both within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area) highlights the problems created for people by facilitating the unrestricted movement of wildlife between protected areas across their land.