Authors: Koenig, Hannes;Hemminger, Karoline;Ostermann-miyashita, Emu-felicitas; Srivastava, Nimisha;Hibler, Sophia;Gandl, Nina;Bluhm, Hendrik;Uthes, Sandra;Kiffner, Christian;

Agricultural landscapes increasingly become arenas of conflict in which human and wildlife compete for the same resources. Designing sustainable strategies requires balancing two apparently diverging goals: (mainly economic) interests of farmers, and conservation of protected species and/or habitats. We present multiple human-wildlife conflict examples from Germany:
•expansion of gray wolf populations vs. livestock depredation,
•changing migratory flyways of cranes vs. crop damages,
•recolonization of mega-herbivores such as European bison and moose vs. (yet) unknown damages,
•outbreak of African swine fever in wild boar vs. fencing activities.
These examples suggest that the damage mitigation measures to protect the economic interests of farmers conflicts with legal conservation frameworks. This discrepancy is manifested in opposing stakeholder interests, and causes human-human conflict. Integrated impact assessment can be used as a tool to identify trade-offs and to assess alternative policy measures and management options and their likely effects on humans and wildlife. The concept of human-wildlife coexistence provides a holistic framework in which social and economic aspects of people and ecological needs of wildlife are considered in an integrated way. We illustrate examples of integrated impact assessment for human-wildlife interaction and discuss ideas for policy and management implications.