Invisible barriers to connectivity: anthropogenic resistance and functional connectivity in large carnivore conservation

Current connectivity planning for large carnivores (LC) predominantly assesses landscape resistance based on landscape’s biophysical components such as land cover and infrastructure. Although recent approaches have broadened this framework by incorporating ecological processes beyond purely physical features, including intra- and interspecific interactions, the role of human dimension remains largely overlooked as a key determinant of functional connectivity. Attempts to incorporate human influence into connectivity analyses typically rely on indirect spatial proxies of anthropogenic pressure, including human population density or proximity to roads and settlements. However, these proxies fail to capture the direct effects of human behaviours on wildlife movement and survival. Building on the concept of anthropogenic resistance, defined as the influence of human behaviours on species’ movement, survival, and movement-related costs, this contribution highlights how practices such as persecution, hunting, tolerance or supplementary feeding, land-use and livestock management can act as invisible barriers to functional connectivity, regardless human presence itself. Neglecting these dimensions may result in over- or underestimation of connectivity, potentially leading to socially unsustainable corridors or ecological traps. Human behaviours are influenced by interacting factors operating at individual, community, and institutional levels, in turn rooted in socio-cultural contexts and historical experience shaping values and core beliefs. These include perceptions and attitudes, social identity and local traditions, legal and policy frameworks (e.g. protection regimes and hunting regulations), habitat and species management, and coexistence strategies (e.g. economic incentives and compensations). The occurrence and intensity of human actions therefore vary spatially in response to psychological, socio-economic, cultural, and institutional drivers, often at fine spatial scales. However, LC populations naturally extend beyond administrative boundaries, requiring conservation objectives and planning approaches operating at broader spatial scales. Within the transboundary framework of the 4PETHABECO project, integrating anthropogenic resistance into habitat and connectivity planning is particularly relevant. The region encompasses diverse socio-cultural backgrounds, land-use practices, management traditions, and coexistence histories, which interact with physical barriers to influence connectivity among shared wildlife populations across national borders. This contribution advocates for a multi-scalar social–ecological approach integrating landscape and anthropogenic resistance to support more effective, socially acceptable, and coordinated transnational strategies for long-term coexistence and conservation.