Abstract Balancing agricultural productivity with biodiversity conservation is a critical challenge in rural Africa, where food insecurity and poverty intersect with growing ecological pressures. Understanding how communities anticipate and respond to socio‐ecological change is essential for designing interventions that sustain livelihoods while safeguarding biodiversity. Using scenario‐based methods with 317 household interviews near Kasungu National Park, Malawi, we explored how plausible futures, spanning conservation strategies, agricultural policies, and public interventions, might influence food security, natural resource use, people‐park relations, and wellbeing. Scenarios involving increased farm input prices and wildlife translocations were widely expected to reduce food security and wellbeing and were perceived as unfair. In contrast, universal input subsidies and wildlife damage compensation were seen as fair and beneficial, though questions remain about their sustainability and governance. Buffer zone restoration generated geographically divergent responses: generally accepted in fenced communities but strongly opposed in unfenced areas due to expected restrictions on farmland and resource access. These findings demonstrate that interventions are experienced unevenly, shaped by geography, history, and social context. Policies that apply blanket approaches risk reinforcing inequities and undermining legitimacy. More effective strategies should integrate local perspectives, anticipate trade‐offs, and align biodiversity goals with food security and human wellbeing.