Abstract:The evidence to date suggests that wildlife crossing structures can mitigate the barrier effect of roads on wildlife movement, but in many cases have been poorly implemented or evaluated. The most supported measures were the addition of ledges and vegetation cover to increase movement for small mammals; underpasses to prevent the decline in movement of ungulates following road construction; and improving road‐crossing for arboreal mammals using canopy bridges and vegetated medians. We strongly recommend that future use of crossing structures closely adheres to species‐specific, best‐practice guidelines to improve implementation and be paired with a thorough evaluation that includes benchmark comparisons, particularly for measures and species that lack sufficient evidence (e.g. invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and overpasses). The widespread impacts of roads on animal movement have led to the search for innovative mitigation tools. Wildlife crossing structures (tunnels or bridges) are a common approach; however, their effectiveness remains unclear beyond isolated case studies. We conduct an extensive literature review and synthesis to address the question: What is the evidence that wildlife crossing structures mitigate the barrier effect of roads on wildlife movement? In particular, we investigated whether wildlife crossing structures prevented an expected decline in cross‐road movement, restored movement to pre‐construction conditions, or improved movement relative to taking no action. In an analysis of 313 studies, only 14% evaluated whether wildlife crossing structures resulted in a change in animal movement across roads. We identified critical problems in existing studies, especially the lack of benchmarks (e.g. pre‐road, pre‐mitigation, or control data) and the use of biased comparisons. Wildlife crossing structures allowed cross‐road movement in 98% of data sets and improved movement in ~60%. In contrast, the decline of wildlife movement was prevented in fewer than 40% of cases. For most structure types and species groups there was insufficient evidence to draw generalisable conclusions. Synthesis and Applications: The evidence to date suggests that wildlife crossing structures can mitigate the barrier effect of roads on wildlife movement, but in many cases have been poorly implemented or evaluated. The most supported measures were the addition of ledges and vegetation cover to increase movement for small mammals; underpasses to prevent the decline in movement of ungulates following road construction; and improving road‐crossing for arboreal mammals using canopy bridges and vegetated medians. We strongly recommend that future use of crossing structures closely adheres to species‐specific, best‐practice guidelines to improve implementation and be paired with a thorough evaluation that includes benchmark comparisons, particularly for measures and species that lack sufficient evidence (e.g. invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and overpasses).

Ungulate substrate use in fauna passages

Are motorway wildlife passages worth building? Vertebrate use of road-crossing structures on a Spanish motorway

Influences on mammals frequency of use of small bridges and culverts along the Qinghai–Tibet railway, China

Towards effective culvert design: monitoring seasonal use and behavior by Mediterranean mesocarnivores

Is vertebrate mortality correlated to potential permeability by underpasses along low-traffic roads?

Surveying drainage culvert use by carnivores: sampling design and cost-benefit analyzes of track-pads vs. video-surveillance methods

Experimental study on improving the utilization rate of underpasses of bundled linear infrastructure on Tibetan Plateau

Dry paths effectively reduce road mortality of small and medium-sized terrestrial vertebrates

Impact of culvert flooding on carnivore crossings

Seasonal and daily use of canal culverts by mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates

Spatial and temporal factors influencing wildlife use of overpass crossing structures and landscape siphons along a major canal

Scavenging on a pulsed resource: quality matters for corvids but density for mammals

Facilitating permeability of landscapes impacted by roads for protected amphibians: patterns of movement for the great crested newt

Do wildlife crossing structures mitigate the barrier effect of roads on animal movement? A global assessment

Inter-individual variability of stone marten behavioral responses to a highway

Using Camera Traps to estimate Habitat Preferences and Occupancy Patterns of Vertebrates in Boreal Wetlands

Influence of land use intensity on ecological corridors and wildlife crossings' effectiveness: comparison of 2 pilot areas in Austria

Comparative analysis of three different methods for monitoring the use of green bridges by wildlife

Monitoring the use of a canopy bridge and underpasses by arboreal mammals on a Brazilian coastal road

Risk response towards roads is consistent across multiple species in a temperate forest ecosystem

Can supplementary feeding be used to redistribute moose Alces alces?