Interactions between humans and wildlife have created conflicts since time immemorial. Both humans and animals are negatively affected in such conflicts: animals are often subject to lethal control and revenge killings, while the human side suffers significant damage to crops, livestock, and property, and human life. Ecologically friendly mitigation strategies aim to resolve conflict by nonlethal methods that focus on not causing harm to animals while still guaranteeing the interests of people. By setting three main research questions as focus of data gathering and analysis, this study aims to document the environmentally friendly mitigation methods and strategies that have been implemented at Lipahak Ecological Farm (LEF), since its establishment until present day, and to understand the specific advantages and disadvantages of these methods. The study also aims to investigate the factors that influence local farmers’ opinions on HWC and their willingness to consider ecologically friendly mitigation methods, and to identify the priorities of farmers when dealing with HWC. This research used literature review and qualitative research methods such as semi-structured interviews and participant observation to collect data. The process of data collection, data analysis, and thesis writing was done over the time period September 2020 – July 2021. Research findings show that HWC on LEF mainly happens in the form of crop raiding by several key species (ring-necked pheasant, common moorhen, Ryukyu mouse, lesser ricefield rat, greater bandicoot rat, wild boar). Crop raiding occurs frequently and can reach devastating extent if left unchecked. About a dozen different experimental methods and strategies have been implemented on LEF, most of which have proven to be effective to various degrees, but still showing significant drawbacks that make them less likely to be accepted by a greater public. Research findings indicate that if crop damage could be mitigated by less harmful methods and additional compensation would be available, farmers would be less likely to harm wildlife and more likely to consider and implement eco-friendly strategies. Efficiency, convenience, and the extent of related necessary investments (financial costs, labor intensity, time) are major factors farmers will consider when deciding which strategy to use. Farmers’ opinion on HWC and crop raiding species is influenced by factors such as severity of damage, frequency of crop raiding, population size of animals.

Chapter 1: Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Research Motivation and Purpose 3
Chapter 2: Literature review 5
2.1. Defining Human-Wildlife Conflict 5
2.2 Causes and Consequences 6
2.3 Conflict Types and Species 9
2.3.1 Terrestrial species 10
2.3.2 Marine species 11
2.4 Conflict Management 12
2.4.1 Human responses to conflict 12
2.4.2 Mitigation strategies 13
2.4.3 Question of adoption 17
2.5 Situation in Taiwan 23
2.5.1 Human-wildlife conflicts in Taiwanese agriculture 23
2.5.2 Satoyama Initiative concepts 25
2.6 Research Gap 27
Chapter 3: Methodology 29
3.1 Study Site 29
3.1.1 Location and community 29
3.1.2 Establishment goals 30
3.1.3 LEF farmlands 32
3.1.4 Local participants 33
3.2 Research Questions 34
3.3 Timescale 35
3.4 Research Data 36
3.4.1 Data Collection 36
3.4.2 Data Processing and Analysis 39
3.5 Limitations of Research 40
Chapter 4: Research Findings 43
4.1 Chronological overview 43
4.2 Biodiversity 44
4.3 Human-wildlife conflict on Lipahak Ecological Farm 47
4.4 Mitigation methods 48
4.4.1 Description and use history 49
4.4.2 Comparison and evaluation 57
4.5 Farmers’ perspective 62
Chapter 5: Discussion 66
5.1. Conflict and mitigation on LEF 66
5.2 Opinions and adaptation by farmers 70
Chapter 6: Conclusion 73
6.1 Conclusion 73
6.2 Suggestions for future research 75
References 77

Bazeley, P. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis: Practical Strategies. SAGE, London
Best, I. & Pei, K.J.C. (2020). Factors influencing local attitudes towards the conservation of leopard cats Prionailurus bengalensis in rural Taiwan. Oryx, Volume 54, Issue 6: 866–872
Bhatia, S., Redpath, S., Suryawanshi, K., & Mishra, C. (2020). Beyond conflict: Exploring the spectrum of human–wildlife interactions and their underlying mechanisms. Oryx, 54(5), 621–628
Boitani, L., Powell, R.A., eds. (2012). Carnivore Ecology and Conservation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
Burgess, G.H. (2015). ISAF 2014. Worldwide Shark Attack Summary. Gainesville, FL: Florida Museum of National History, University of Florida
Can, Ö.E., D’Cruze, N., Garshelis, D.L., Beecham, J. & Macdonald, D.W. (2014). Resolving human-bear conflict: a global survey of countries, experts, and key factors. Conservation Letters 7:501–13
Carter, N.H., Baeza, A., Magliocca, N.R. (2020). Emergent conservation outcomes of shared risk perception in human-wildlife systems. Conservation Biology, Volume 34, No. 4, 903–914
Carter, N.H., Linnell, J.D.C. (2016). Co-adaptation is key to coexisting with large carnivores. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 31:575–578
Carter, N.H., López-Bao, J.V., Bruskotter, J.T. et al. (2017). A conceptual framework for understanding illegal killing of large carnivores. Ambio 46, 251–264
Chang, YC., Uphoff, N.T. & Yamaji, E. (2016). A conceptual framework for eco-friendly paddy farming in Taiwan, based on experimentation with System of Rice Intensification (SRI) methodology. Paddy Water Environ 14, 169–183
Chao, J.T. & Feng, K.Y. (1988). A preliminary study on the biology of Formosan wild pigs (Sus scrofa taivanus). Bulletin of Taiwan Forestry Research Institute 3 (1):353–362.
Chapron, G. & Treves, A. (2016). Blood does not buy goodwill: allowing culling increases poaching of a large carnivore. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 283
Chapron, G., Kaczensky, P., Linnell, J.D.C., von Arx, M., Huber, D., et al. (2014). Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes. Science 346:1517–19
Clark, S.G., Rutherford, M.B., Mattson, D.J. (2014). Large carnivores, people, and governance. In: Larger Carnivore Conservation: Integrating Science and Policy in the North American West, ed. SG Clark, MB Rutherford, pp. 20–28. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Conover, M.R. (2002). Resolving Human-Wildlife Conflicts: The Science of Wildlife Damage Management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
Dickman, A.J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: the importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human–wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation 13:458–66
Dickman, A.J., Macdonald, E.A., Macdonald, D.W. (2011). A review of financial instruments to pay for predator conservation and encourage human-carnivore coexistence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:13937–44
Dorresteijn, I., Milcu, A.I., Leventon, J., Hanspach, J., Fischer, J. (2016). Social factors mediating human–carnivore coexistence: understanding thematic strands influencing coexistence in Central Romania. Ambio, 45, 490–500.
Duncan, C., Kretz, D., Wegmann, M., Rabeil, T., Pettorelli, N. (2014). Oil in the Sahara: mapping anthropogenic threats to Saharan biodiversity from space. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 369:20130191
Flick, U. (2009). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. SAGE, London
Fontorbel, F.E., Simonetti, J.A. (2011). Translocations and human-carnivore conflicts: Problem solving or problem creating? Wildlife Biology 17:217–24
Fooden, J., Wu, H.Y. (2001). Systematic review of the Taiwanese Macaque, Macaca cyclopis Swinhoei, 1863. Fieldiana Zoology, new series, 98:1–70.
Frank, B., Glikman, J.A., Marchini, S. (2019). Human–wildlife interactions: turning conflict into coexistence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Fushin Lipahak Ecological Farm (2019). 富興Lipahak生態農場. Taiwan Forestry Bureau, C.O.A., National Dong Hwa University
Ghadim, A.K.A., Pannell, D.J., Burton, M.P. (2005). Risk, uncertainty, and learning in adoption of a crop innovation. Agricultural economics 33: 1–9.
Hill, C.M., Webber, A.D., Priston, N.E.C. (2017). Understanding conflicts about wildlife: a biosocial approach. Berghahn Books, New York.
Hoare, R. (2012). Lessons from 15 years of human elephant conflict mitigation: management considerations involving biological, physical and governance issues in Africa. Pachyderm 51:60–74
Hockings, K. & Humle, T. (2009). Best practice guidelines for the prevention and mitigation of conflict between humans and great apes. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group.
Hsu, M.J., Kao, C., Agoramoorthy, G. (2009). Interactions between visitors and Formosan macaques (Macaca cyclopis) at Shou-Shan Nature Park, Taiwan. American Journal of Primatology. 71:214-222.
Huber, R., Bakker, M., Balmann, A., Berger, T., et al. (2018). Representation of decision-making in European agricultural agent-based models. Agricultural Systems 167:143–160.
Hwang, C.Y. (1998). Wildlife management study on wild boar in Taiwan. National Taiwan University, Master thesis, Taipei 109pp.
Inskip, C., Zimmermann, A. (2009). Human-felid conflict: a review of patterns and priorities worldwide. Oryx 43:18–34
IUCN SSC Human-Wildlife Conflict Task Force 2020. https://www.hwctf.org/ (last accessed 8/6/2021)
Japan Environment Quarterly (JEQ) Volume 4, December 2013. https://www.env.go.jp/en/focus/jeq/issue/vol04/topics.html (last accessed 18/7/2021)
Kansky, R., Kidd, M., Knight, A.T. (2014). Meta-analysis of attitudes toward damage-causing mammalian wildlife. Conservation Biology, 28, 924–938.
König, H.J., Kiffner, C., Kramer-Schadt, S., Fürst, C., Keuling, O., Ford, A.T. (2020). Human–wildlife coexistence in a changing world. Conservation Biology, Volume 34, No. 4, 786–794
Laist, D.W., Knowlton, A.R., Mead, J.G., Collet, A.S., Podesta, M. (2001). Collisions between ships and whales. Marine Mammal Science 17:35–75
Landscape Conservation & Community Participation Laboratory (2013). 富興Lipahak生態農場與里山倡議 (Fushin Lipahak Ecological Farm and the Satoyama Initiative). National Dong Hwa University and Taiwan Forestry Bureau. Leaflet
Linnell, J.D.C., Aanes, R., Swenson, J.E., Odden, J., Smith, M.E. (1997). Translocation of carnivores as a method for managing problem animals: a review. Biodiversity and Conservation 6:1245–57
Linnell, J.D.C., Trouwborst, A., Boitani, L., Kaczensky, P., Huber, D., et al. (2016). Border Security Fencing and Wildlife: The End of the Transboundary Paradigm in Eurasia?. PLOS Biology 14(6): e1002483.
Loveridge, A.J., Wang, S.W., Frank, L.G., Seidensticker, J. (2010). People and wild felids: conservation of cats and management of conflicts. In: Biology and Conservation of Wild Felids. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
Macdonald, D.W. & Loveridge, A.J. (2010). Biology and Conservation of Wild Felids. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
Macdonald, D.W., Sillero-Zubiri, C., eds. (2004). The Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
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.
Manfredo, M.J. & Dayer, A.A. (2004). Concepts for exploring the social aspects of human–wildlife conflict in a global context. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9:17–328
Marchini, S., Ferraz, K.M.P.M.B., Zimmermann, A., Guimarães-Luiz, T., Morato, R., Correa, P.L.P., Macdonald, D.W. (2019). Planning for coexistence in a complex human-dominated world. Pages 414–438 in Frank, B., Glikman, J.A., Marchini, S., eds. Human–wildlife interactions: turning conflict into coexistence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Massey, A.L., King, A.A., Foufopoulos, J. (2014). Fencing protected areas: a long-term assessment of the effects of reserve establishment and fencing on African mammalian diversity. Biological Conservation 176:162–171.
Mc Guinness, S. & Taylor, D. (2014). Farmers’ Perceptions and Actions to Decrease Crop Raiding by Forest-Dwelling Primates Around a Rwandan Forest Fragment, Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 19:2, 179-190
Mech, L.D. (1970). The Wolf: The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species. Minneapolis: Univiversity of Minneapolis
Morzillo, A.T., de Beurs, K.M., Martin-Mikle, C.J. (2014). A conceptual framework to evaluate human-wildlife interactions within coupled human and natural systems. Ecology and Society 19:44.
Naughton-Treves, L. (1998). Predicting patterns of crop damage by wildlife around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Conservation Biology 12:156–68
Naugle, D.E. (2011). Energy Development and Wildlife Conservation in Western North America. Washington DC: Island Press
Noga, S.R., Kolawole, O.D., Thakadu, O., Masunga, G. (2015). Small farmers’ adoption behaviour: uptake of elephant crop-raiding deterrent innovations in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 7:408–419.
Nyhus, P.J. (2016). Human-wildlife conflict and coexistence. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 41:143–171.
Nyhus, P.J., Osofsky, S.A., Ferraro, P., Fischer, H., Madden, F. (2005). Bearing the costs of human-wildlife conflict: the challenges of compensation schemes. Faculty Scholarship. 15.
Ohrens, O., Treves, A., Bonacic, C. (2016). Relationship between rural depopulation and puma-human conflict in the high Andes of Chile. Environmental Conservation 43:24–33
Pannell, D.J., Marshall, G.R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., Wilkinson, R. (2006). Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46:1407–1424.
Redpath, S.M., Bhatia, S., Young, J. (2015). Tilting at wildlife: reconsidering human-wildlife conflict. Oryx 49:222–225.
Redpath, S.M., Young, J., Evely, A., Adams, W.M., Sutherland, W.J., et al. (2013). Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28:100–9
Reed, M.S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological Conservation 141:2417–2431.
Reidinger, R.F. Jr., Miller, J.E. (2013). Wildlife Damage Management: Prevention, Problem Solving, and Conflict Resolution. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press
Riley, S.J., Nesslage, G.M., Maurer, B.A. (2004). Dynamics of early wolf and cougar eradication efforts in Montana: implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 119:575–79
Rodriguez, J.M., Molnar, J.J., Fazio, R.A., Sydnor, E., Lowe, M.J. (2009). Barriers to adoption of sustainable agriculture practices: change agent perspectives. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24:60–71.
Satoyama Initiative official website https://satoyama-initiative.org/concept/satoyama-initiative/ (last accessed 25/7/2021)
Schmitz, C., van Meijl, H., Kyle, P., Nelson, G.C., Fujimori, S., et al. (2014). Land-use change trajectories up to 2050: insights from a global agro-economic model comparison. Agricultural Economics 45:69–84
Seijger, C., Douven, W., van Halsema, G., Hermans, L., Evers, J., Phi, H.L., Khan, M.F., Brunner, J., Pols, L., Ligtvoet, W., Koole, S., Slager, K., Vermoolen, M.S., Hasan S. & Hoang, V.T.M. (2017). An analytical framework for strategic delta planning: negotiating consent for long-term sustainable delta development, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 60:8, 1485-1509
Snyder, K.D. & Rentsch, D. (2020). Rethinking assessment of success of mitigation strategies for elephant-induced crop damage. Conservation Biology, Volume 34, No. 4., 829–842
Soulsbury, C.D., White, P.C.L. (2015). Human-wildlife interactions in urban areas: a review of conflicts, benefits and opportunities. In Wildlife Research: Interactions Between Humans and Wildlife in Urban Areas, ed. Taylor, A., White, P., pp. 541–53. Australia: CSIRO
Sukumar, R. (1989). The Asian Elephant: Ecology and Management. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
Tilman, D. (1999). Global environmental impacts of agricultural expansion: the need for sustainable and efficient practices. PNAS. 96:5995–6000
Treves, A. & Karanth, K.U. (2003). Human-carnivore conflict: local solutions with global applications. Conservation Biology 17:1489–1490.
Treves, A. & Santiago-Ávila, F.J. (2020). Myths and assumptions about human-wildlife conflict and coexistence. Conservation Biology, Volume 34, No. 4, 811–818
Treves, A., Wallace, R.B., Naughton-Treves, L., Morales, A. (2006). Co-managing human–wildlife conflicts: a review. Human Dimensions of Wildlife. 11:383–96
Tseng, J.M., Lin, L., Xu, Z.Y., Lin, T.Y., Huang, A.W., Li, G.Z., Fan, M.L. (2015). 花蓮生態農業巡禮Ecological farming in Hualien. Hualien District Agricultural Research and Extension Station, C.O.A.
Wang, Y., Lee, K.W., Chiai, J.L. and Wu, H.J. (1993). Investigation of the crop damage and prevention method of wildlife in Taiwan. Council of Agriculture, Taipei, Taiwan. 76pp.
Woodroffe, R., Hedges, S., Durant, S.M. (2014). To fence or not to fence. Science 344:46–48
Woodroffe, R., Thirgood, S., Rabinowitz, A., eds. (2005). People and Wildlife: Conflict or Coexistence?. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Wu, H.Y. & Lin, Y.S. (1997). Wildlife population management around villages in the Taroko National Park. Headquarter of Taroko National Park, Ministry of Interior. 74pp.
WWF 2020. Reducing conflict between people and wildlife https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/wildlife_practice/human_wildlife_conflict/ (last accessed 8/6/2021)
Yen, S.C., Chen, K.H., Wang, Y., Wang, C.P. (2015). Residents' attitudes toward reintroduced sika deer in Kenting National Park, Taiwan. Wildlife Biology, 21(4): 220–226
Zhong, M.J. (2014). 里山倡議之逐夢踏實 ---花蓮富興生態農場創設歷程與經營議題之研究 (Put Satoyama Initiative into practice: A study of the development and management issues of the Lipahak Eco-Farm in Fushin village, Hualien). National Dong Hwa University. Master’s thesis
李玲玲、吳海音、張从緯、徍芝敏、摩悌 (2000). 台灣獼猴現況調查。行政院農業委員會報告.
林俊男 (2019). 台灣農民採用友善環境耕作法的關鍵因素與推廣策略. 農業試驗所特刊216: 95–111
林良恭 (2013). 台灣獼猴危害調查評估及處理示範作業模式之建置(1/2)。 行政院 農 業 委 員 會 林 務 局 保 育 研 究 系 列101-18號。
蘇秀慧 (2014). 二水、名間地區台灣獼猴監測調查。行政院農業委員會林務局南投林區管理處
蘇秀慧、鄧彥齡、張嘉玲 (2020). 二水人猴交會區台灣獼猴(Macaca cyclopis)族群監測. Population monitoring on the Taiwanese macaque (Macaca cyclopis) in the human-macaque interface in Ershui in central Taiwan. 台灣生物多樣性研究(TW J. of Biodivers.) 22(3): 221-238
蘇秀慧、粘書維 (2013). 壽山國自然公園臺灣獼猴(Macaca cyclopis)族群密度及人猴互動。國家公園學報 23: 33-48
吳幸如 (2009). 狩獵與危害防治對臺灣野豬(Sus scrofa taivanus)族群影響之探討.國立台灣師範大學生命科學系博士論文.
楊大吉 (2018). 友善環境心農業 - 翻轉東部新農業，宜蘭花蓮有機與友善環境農業推動實務 (Promotion of Practices of Organic and Eco-Friendly Farming at Ilan and Hualien County). 臺中區農業改良場特刊 : 135:9–15