Beyond compensation: Governing human-wildlife coexistence under climate and land-use change

Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is intensifying globally under accelerating land-use change, climate variability, and wildlife population recovery. Compensation schemes remain a central policy response, yet their effectiveness in securing long-term coexistence remains contested. This review synthesizes evidence from 250 peer-reviewed and gray-literature sources across Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Europe to evaluate compensation, mitigation, and coexistence instruments. Using a qualitative evaluative synthesis, we assess governance outcomes related to financial sustainability, administrative efficiency, equity, preventive integration, and social legitimacy. Evidence indicates that compensation improves short-term tolerance but rarely reduces conflict incidence when implemented in isolation. More durable coexistence emerges where compensation is embedded within governance systems integrating prevention, participatory institutions, and landscape-scale planning. We propose a multi-level coexistence governance framework that links financial instruments, institutional responsibility, and adaptive capacity under climate and land-use change, highlighting the need to move beyond reactive compensation toward equitable risk governance in shared landscapes.