We established an evaluation framework for sustainable forest management (SFM) development based on locals’ perspectives using the importance-performance analysis (IPA) method in a rural area of Taiwan. It identified the factors that affected local people’s participation in and awareness of SFM based on local demographics, development factors of SFM, and perceptions of SFM, through the logistic regression method (LRM). Both the levels of importance and performance (I-P) of the SFM indicators were rated by the local residents and the differences between importance–performance among indigenous and non-indigenous people were examined. The factors that affected differentiation of local people’s participation in the SFM program were: (1) forestry workers, (2) indigenous people, and (3) SFM development factors. The findings provide both theoretical constructs and policy implications for SFM mechanisms for the forest stewardship council (FSC) and sustainable development goals (SDGs) in a sustainable rural development.

In this paper, we present a conceptual framework of human–elephant conflict (HEC) management embodying community aspects gleaned from the importance–performance analysis (IPA) for a National Park in Vietnam. Nine approaches were proposed to prevent and mitigate HEC (HEC indicators), of which six fell into different quadrants based on the respective estimations of farmer and non-farmer respondents. Both the levels of importance and performance (I-P) of the HEC indicators are evaluated between (I-P) among farmers and non-farmers. Locals perceived the importance of all HEC indicators highly, but they thought its performance is poor. Third, we confirm the factors affecting the locals’ participation behavior towards HEC management based on their demographics, awareness, and behavior in terms of HEC, and their perceptions of HEC. Compared to the non-farmer residents, the farmers recognized that the management strategy of HEC must focus on the aspects of building an insurance scheme and implementing appropriate land use planning. The characteristics that affect the differentiation of the locals’ participation of HEC management are: (1) higher income residents, (2) farmers, (3) residents who would like to participate in an insurance scheme, and (4) the HEC management factors. Theoretical insights and management implications are also addressed in this study.

Human–wildlife conflict studies of high‐altitude areas are rare due to budget constraints and the challenging nature of research in these remote environments. This study investigates the prevalence and increasing trend of human–wildlife conflict (HWC) in the mountainous Gaurishankar Conservation Area (GCA) of Nepal, with a specific focus on leopard (Panthera pardus) and Himalayan black bear (Ursus thibetanus laniger). The study analyzes a decade of HWC reports and identifies goats as the livestock most targeted by leopards. The Dolakha district of GCA received the highest number of reports, highlighting the need for mitigation measures in the area. In GCA, livestock attacks accounted for 85% of compensation, with the remaining 15% for human injuries. We estimate that the number of reported wildlife attacks grew on average by 33% per year, with an additional increase of 57 reports per year following the implementation of a new compensation policy during BS 2076 (2019 AD). While bear attacks showed no significant change post‐rule alteration, leopard attack reports surged from 1 to 60 annually, indicating improved compensation may have resulted in increased leopard‐attack reporting rates. The findings emphasize the economic impact of HWC on local communities and suggest strategies such as increasing prey populations, promoting community education and awareness, enhancing alternative livelihood options, developing community‐based insurance programs, and implementing secure enclosures (corrals) to minimize conflicts and foster harmonious coexistence. This research addresses a knowledge gap in HWC in high‐altitude conservation areas like the GCA, providing valuable insights for conservation stakeholders and contributing to biodiversity conservation and the well‐being of humans and wildlife.

Human‐wildlife conflict is a global issue that poses a major threat to biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Wildlife adapted to human‐modified landscapes in developing countries can threaten the safety and livelihood of local communities. In such landscapes, where people and wildlife compete for resources, community involvement is promoted to achieve workable coexistence. We used a choice experiment methodology approach to identify community‐preferred policy alternatives in Chitwan National Park in south‐central Nepal. The results indicated that conflicts between the local community and wildlife are on the rise, crop damage being the highest form of damage and most perceived compensation and fencing as conflict‐mitigation tools. The choice experiment showed that residents have a positive preference for enhancing livelihood diversification skills, cultivating buffer crops, promoting alternative livelihoods, and strengthening rapid response teams. We identified concerned mitigators who are younger age group, encountered and concurred that HWC is increasing, and agreed that fencing and compensation are conflict‐mitigation tools. We designed scenario planning using community‐preferred policy alternatives to assist the park management. This is the first‐choice experiment study to design an evaluation framework under community resilience perspectives to achieve workable coexistence. Our study has potential implications for promoting coexistence in a human‐dominated landscape.