Is Convivial Conservation A Solution for Human-Wildlife Interactions Around Protected Areas?

Conserving biodiversity requires resolving human-wildlife conflicts in protected areas. Conservation NGOs, community-based organisations, governments, development agencies, and donors have debated these strategies to anticipate fundamental changes. Humans' biggest challenge is co-existing with animals during biodiversity extinction, as wild animals kill humans annually, prompting retaliation. Balancing nature conservation and economic viability is threatening. Community-based conservation balances conservation with development. This article examines the shortcomings of human-wildlife conflict resolution methods using Selous Game Reserve in Tanzania as a case study. It expands on Buscher and Fletcher's "convivial conservation" proposal, which promotes fundamental equity, organisational transformation, and environmental justice to create a more equitable and sustainable global community (Buscher and Fletcher, 2019). Convivial conservation addresses social, cultural, ecological, and political-economic issues affecting humans and biodiversity. Community-based organisations around protected areas were supposed to benefit local communities, but they have distorted livelihoods, increased human-wildlife conflicts, and destabilised local resource institutions without compensation. Similarly, human-animal conflicts can have a substantial impact on poverty by increasing illegal activities. Political ecology perspectives and convivial conservation will be used to suggest methods for resolving human-wildlife conflicts. The analysis is based on empirical data from published studies and extensive field research conducted in the study area through interviews, surveys, group discussions, and direct observations using narratives and narration.