What’s taught in school is usually not how the real world works. Yes, it’s great to have some theoretical knowledge about certain topics, but the real world often contains many more direct and indirect factors that determine the outcome of what you want to do. When talking to Silvio Marchini, who is a bridge-builder in human-wildlife coexistence, we find out that this also applies to the field of conservation. What position do we have as a conservationist when we focus on human-wildlife interactions? 

He started out as being a biologist himself. The general thought of ‘I love nature and I want to protect it’ was also at the core of his career. Yet, today his career has been shaped by his experiences in the field and he is the proud owner of Plan4coex. Who is he today and what can he tell us about his perspective in conservation? 

After graduation Silvio soon found out, just being a conservationist wasn’t enough. The usual approach when being a conservationist is: ‘I did some research, found some results and now I’ll tell the locals how they should deal with wildlife.’ Oftentimes, the emphasis on research and documentation is so big, that the actual emphasis on change gets forgotten. Another problem with this approach is the wrong balance a conservationist gets when he proposes a solution to locals and surrounding people. Suddenly, the conservationist who is supposed to be on two sides of this situation, chooses the side of wildlife.

With the aim of mitigating the conflict, it is necessary to be neutral in a conversation. Taking the wildlife’s side will work against you in solving the problem. According to Silvio “We expect people to be more tolerant with this neutral approach”. As a so-called bridge-building in human-wildlife coexistence, this is exactly his goal with Plan4coex. That brings us to the fact that he is an entrepreneur besides his role as conservationist. During the enlightenment that we can’t choose the wildlife’s side in any given situation, I also realized that we as humans are at the core of the problem but we are also the core of the solution. Often, the local or involved people that I talk to, don’t even know that they are involved in a so-called ‘problem’ or ‘human-wildlife conflict’. 

That – not even knowing that they are involved in a conflict – is also the reason why he never speaks of conflicts anymore. The meeting of humans with wildlife, with any given result (positive or negative) is simply an interaction. The general term ‘human-wildlife conflict’ is often too focussed on the negative and this can easily be changed. 

But with this information, how should conservationists act then, when interfering or trying to solve an interaction? It’s quite simple. By changing the terminology used and trying to understand every single stakeholder, the perspective on the situation gets wider and better. As he said before, the solution can be found in ‘change’. 

“Change should be introduced in a precipatory way. Conventionally, biologists say “I do ecological research, because I love this specific animal. As I love them, I don’t want them to die and be extinguished.” I, however, would rather say: “I’m a biologist, an expert at jaguars.” And then I would go beyond that. I step outside university and the lab. I will ask society: “What problems do you have with jaguars?” There will certainly be stakeholders who have problems with them. Those are my clients. He works with and for them to resolve the problem. We decide what research needs to be done, what the intention is and what our end goal ideally should be.”

It is clear that is searching for a trans-disciplinarity collaboration. Which program or project should be addressed? What are the steps that need to be taken? And how can we monitor the effects and the changes which are a result of our steps? When we look back at the conservation history, we can now see that we arrived at a third stage. We went from an solely ecological approach, to a combination with social sciences. Today we have arrived to a situation where those disciplines are also combined with an ethical perspective. 

It remains the question when something, a project or an approach in human-wildlife coexistence, is ethically right. It takes us back to the more philosophical roots of decision making. You could say “I understand that there is a certain subjectivity of what is right and wrong, but I understand that there is a form of universally right or wrong as well”. The bottom line of all this, is that you should consider that there is a diversity of ethical views. What I consider right and wrong is not right and wrong for everyone. It is so common that scientists, ecologists, biologists think ‘I have the truth’, because science is the truth. We should make decisions on ‘what is true’. 

However, the trend in wildlife conservation is beyond that. Luckily. What ultimately matters is not just the scientific truth. The ultimate decisions will be based on peoples’ lives and ethical values. “We need other ways to take this into account in a fair way. In Plan4coex we implement this in our daily chores, but we also teach others this way of thinking via our workshops.” Alone there is a lot Silvio can do, but sharing knowledge and making people responsible for their own situations is a better and more efficient tactic. 

A workshop starts with the participants identifying the human-wildlife interactions. Then the participants create a map of the system. It’s about identifying the direct and indirect factors that are of interest in this human-wildlife interaction. Once we have that, we know what we can do and what we can develop to influence that interaction positively. And we can improve the interaction altogether. For each of those indirect and direct effects, we want to monitor the results. And that’s the basis for adaptive management. It’s a sideways movement, not lineair. 

In the last year we have done six of these workshops from jaguars in Iguazu National Park to North Eastern Brazil (semi-desert with jaguars), in the Amazon and in Costa Rica. “I’m looking forward to more diversity. Both in wildlife species and in landscapes of this workshop from Plan4Coex.”, as Silvio emphasizes. 

The aim of plan4coex is to go beyond that one specific species that you want to save. It’s about changing the peoples’ perspective on wildlife, with whichever species they are dealing with. That also makes it difficult to invite people from abroad to become involved in any of Silvio’s projects. Luckily there are definitely some projects and ecotourism locations in Brazil which he prefers, so we are more than happy to share this intel. The most sustainable project in the Central Amazon is definitely Mamirauá. This institute for Sustainable Development takes care of  research, management and extension programs in the Solimoes region in the Amazon.  Alongside this institute you have Uakari Lodge. Silvio is determined that this ecolodge should be your accommodation if you want to have the full sustainable experience in the Amazon. 

Secondly, the Atlantic Forest cannot be forgotten. With only a 2 to 3 hour drive, it is extremely close to São Paulo City. It’s less focussed on wildlife conservation, yet just as stunning with the high intensity of diverse ecosystems. Don’t forget to visit local people and communities. You are supposed to ‘just watch the animal’ when you’re a wildlife tourist. However, you can add great experiences and benefits during your trip if you go beyond enjoying the wildlife and nature. Take the most out of your stay and indulge yourself in the full cultural experience of Brazil. 

As a truly inspiring connector, more about Silvios work can be seen on his website and heard in his TEDtalk. If you are eager to join his workshop about coexistence with nature, a simple email will do the work, but if you are ready today to dive into this topic, browse to his Facebook group ‘Human-Wildlife Coexistence: science & practise’ and join now!