Crocodilians are socially and ecological important apex predators. Yet, many societies struggle to share space with crocodilians, especially in urban and coastal regions. The literature provides fragmented insights into human-crocodilian coexistence and conflict across the urban-rural gradient. We conducted an exploratory review of the literature to identify trends in research and opportunities for researchers to unearth potential principles of human coexistence with crocodilian species within cognitive, spatial, and governance domains. Our results follow two lines of inquiry: (a) interactions in increasingly urbanizing areas, and (b) interactions in natural resource dependent rural communities. In both instances, our review revealed the influential role of cognitions in human defense of symbolic and material livelihoods and negotiating human-crocodilian interactions. Our findings also demonstrated that studies insufficiently attend to larger forces (e.g., rural-urban drift, land use change, societal adaptive capacity) influencing interactions. Understanding social-ecological connections between humans and apex predators are necessary to rethink coexistence.

Tolerance has become a central position in wildlife conservation thought, and a goal in and of itself. Appeals to tolerance are expected to grow as the planet becomes more crowded, species are lost, and habitat is degraded. The concept has been uncritically adopted in wildlife conservation to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts (HWCs). However, scholars have demonstrated that tolerance is burdened with limitations, paradoxes, and shortcomings. Thus, blind adherence to it is not expected to produce a coexistence design necessary to sustain wildlife populations in the long term. This paper is a conceptual scoping project that engages a summary and critique of tolerance as a design principle within wildlife conservation governance. After introducing a resultant theory of dysfunctional human–wildlife coexistence, a pathway toward hospitality as a social institution is outlined via several commitments societies can make to transition to an era of normalizing a process of sincere welcoming, care, and support. The transition from tolerance to hospitality will entail shifting responsibility to humans to modify their behavior to help keep wildlife invisible where it is essential, learning about what wildlife want and need, and ensuring wildlife is not injured for being themselves.

In facing our greatest challenges, researchers have questioned where the ‘wild things’ will reside in the future, and large carnivores have been a primary focal area. The built environment plays a critical role in the propagation of countless species including carnivores; however, contemporary conceptualizations of human–nature relations do not satisfactorily attend to where the built environment should be placed within existing human–nature relation frameworks or how it impacts our ability to find space for carnivores. This paper fills this information gap by investigating the role of the built environment in social–ecological systems (SES), specifically wildlife and carnivore conservation. The paper unfolds in four stages: The first reviews empirical efforts to capture the relationship between human–natural–wildlife systems and the built environment. Second, using insights from the built environment literature, I argue that moving away from a common pool resource focus, decoupling wildlife and natural systems, investigating all infrastructure types and their interactions across systems, and considering the notion of hybrid systems offer pathways forward. Third, an explanation of the built environment's linkages to human and carnivore systems is undertaken to illustrate how the built environment facilitates the material and symbolic interactions through a blending of properties from human, wildlife and natural systems. Lastly, the argument is made that attending to the role of the built environment in human–wildlife relations can stimulate new research that reveals unhelpful habitual behaviour, feedbacks and barriers, and may also help explain unintended or unexplained consequences impacting human–carnivore relations not fully considered under existing frameworks. A freePlain Language Summarycan be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

The legitimacy of large carnivore institutions to exercise truth-making power is assumed by constituents and other audiences. This study examines the power of language in shaping resistance to hegemonic truths about red wolf recovery in North Carolina. We conducted a critical discourse analysis of seven corpora produced by a discourse coalition comprising local, state, and federal actors. We demonstrate that these actors held seven cognitive interpretive repertoires in common (positioning; causality; contrariety; fatalist; falsifiability; victim; and big bad wolf). Findings indicate that repertoires influenced red wolf governance processes, reversed the risk narrative concerning recovery, split cognitive authority over red wolves in the public sphere, and set new, paradoxical limits for scientific inquiry. This study reinforces that language is power and, therefore, language is also legitimation. We conclude that researchers, citizens, and decision makers must attend to the ways in which language control contributes to legitimacy deficits through coordinated resistance.