Reimagining habituation: The case for a reciprocal and contextual understanding

Abstract As the frequency and intensity of human–wildlife interactions continue to rise, the process and outcomes of habituation are becoming more important. Commonly defined as ‘…a waning of response to a repeated, neutral stimuli’ or of similar wording, we argue that these conceptualisations of habituation are too simplistic in the context of direct human–wildlife interactions. We argue that much of the habituation literature has been one‐sided (i.e. focused only on the nonhuman) and detriment‐focused, failing to grasp the deep complexities of the process and its implications. We conducted a brief scoping review of the habituation literature to show how the term is being used by whom, and in what context. We sought to explore habituation from a broad disciplinary range and therefore included literature from ethology, behavioural ecology and conservation biology as well as disciplines less represented in mainstream conservation such as multispecies anthropology, political ecology and more‐than‐human geography. Supported by the scoping review, we illustrate that habituation as an outcome of human–wildlife interactions is (1) a nuanced, reciprocal process that is both understood and practised in diverse ways, with potentially negative and positive impacts for both people and wildlife and (2) is shaped by cultural, historical and political–economic contexts. We share four case examples based on our own research that justify and reinforce our arguments for reframing our understanding of habituation. Adopting more reciprocal and contextual conceptualisations of habituation will improve our collective understanding of how it occurs and how to find ways to adapt and coexist. We urge future research to explore these ideas and understandings through different geographical and species contexts and apply additional disciplinary approaches to understanding and managing human–wildlife interactions. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
People and Nature
Published
2025-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.70140
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reimagining habituation: The case for a reciprocal and contextual understanding

Valerio Donfrancesco, Hanna Pettersson, Christine Ampumuza, Chris Sandbrook et al.
People and Nature
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
article

Reimagining habituation: The case for a reciprocal and contextual understanding

Valerio Donfrancesco, Hanna Pettersson, Christine Ampumuza, Chris Sandbrook, Tom Fry, Douglas A. Clark, Sahil Nijhawan, Ethan D. Doney, Clemens Driessen
article en

Abstract

Abstract As the frequency and intensity of human–wildlife interactions continue to rise, the process and outcomes of habituation are becoming more important. Commonly defined as ‘…a waning of response to a repeated, neutral stimuli’ or of similar wording, we argue that these conceptualisations of habituation are too simplistic in the context of direct human–wildlife interactions. We argue that much of the habituation literature has been one‐sided (i.e. focused only on the nonhuman) and detriment‐focused, failing to grasp the deep complexities of the process and its implications. We conducted a brief scoping review of the habituation literature to show how the term is being used by whom, and in what context. We sought to explore habituation from a broad disciplinary range and therefore included literature from ethology, behavioural ecology and conservation biology as well as disciplines less represented in mainstream conservation such as multispecies anthropology, political ecology and more‐than‐human geography. Supported by the scoping review, we illustrate that habituation as an outcome of human–wildlife interactions is (1) a nuanced, reciprocal process that is both understood and practised in diverse ways, with potentially negative and positive impacts for both people and wildlife and (2) is shaped by cultural, historical and political–economic contexts. We share four case examples based on our own research that justify and reinforce our arguments for reframing our understanding of habituation. Adopting more reciprocal and contextual conceptualisations of habituation will improve our collective understanding of how it occurs and how to find ways to adapt and coexist. We urge future research to explore these ideas and understandings through different geographical and species contexts and apply additional disciplinary approaches to understanding and managing human–wildlife interactions. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

People and NatureVol. 7(10)
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (US), Oregon State University (US), Zoological Society of London (GB), University of Cambridge (GB), Leverhulme Trust (GB), Kabale University (UG), University of Saskatchewan (CA), The London College (GB), University College London (GB), University of York (GB), Nature Conservation Foundation (IN), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.