Human–wildlife coexistence needs more evidence‐based interventions to reduce the losses of crops, livestock and fishery catches

Abstract Evidence‐based interventions designed to reduce wildlife‐caused losses are essential for human–wildlife coexistence. The lack of systematic summarization of research effort and evidence makes it challenging for researchers, managers and policymakers to prioritize interventions for evaluation and implementation. Here, we compiled experimental case studies of nonlethal technical interventions designed to reduce the losses of crops, livestock and fishery catches caused by terrestrial carnivores, elephants, farmland birds and marine fauna worldwide. Then, we summarized the research effort and the performance of interventions by their sensory stimuli and target animals. We found that: (i) 54 of 88 interventions included in this study had statistically effective evidence, where only 39% (21/54) were evaluated with more than three experiments; (ii) physical‐, sound‐, chemical‐ and light (or visual) ‐based interventions were the most in numbers and their performance varied greatly; (iii) farmland birds, seabirds and cetaceans were the most studied animal groups while there are only a few experiments for elephants; and (iv) the interventions for marine fauna generally had no impact on the target catch of fisheries. Syntheses and applications : Our results indicated that collective effort is needed to further evaluate interventions using various sensory stimuli and launch incentive programs to motivate the implementation of interventions, particularly related to marine fauna conservation. Our synthesis could be helpful for stakeholders to tackle the negative human‐wildlife interactions outlined as Target 4 of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.