scholarly journals An experimental test of community‐based strategies for mitigating human–wildlife conflict around protected areas

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola S. Branco ◽  
Jerod A. Merkle ◽  
Robert M. Pringle ◽  
Lucy King ◽  
Tosca Tindall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Experimental Test ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

scholarly journals Centring knowledge democracy within policy-making for sustainability and resilience: A discussion of the Kenyan drylands

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nkatha Mercy
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Land Surface ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Community Empowerment ◽  
Environmental Conservation ◽  
Livestock Grazing ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Major Life ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

Culture, environment and, therefore, knowledge of socioeconomic constructs are intricately interwoven. Over the past decade or two, pastoralists without formal education in Kenyan drylands have increasingly found themselves on the receiving end of community empowerment trainings that lean towards human–wildlife conflict and environmental conservation. Why would research entities set aside mega budgets to teach the pastoralist about human–wildlife conflict? A pastoralist who has long roamed drylands with his livestock grazing alongside elephants and lions, and whose major life transition ceremonies, celebrations, songs, riddles, proverbs, sayings, poetry and jokes fundamentally feature wildlife. What makes these trainings in ‘imparting knowledge’ superior to the ‘indigenous knowledge’ already in the custody of the Borana or the Turkana or the Rendile? This article explores the relevance of community-based knowledges in addressing sustainable development and climate resilience, as articulated by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The specific setting for this discussion is the Kenyan drylands, which are central to the achievement of the SDG agenda given that they constitute 84 percent of Kenya’s total land surface. They also host up to 75 percent of  Kenya’s wildlife population, account for more than 80 percent of the country’s eco-tourism interests and support about 9.9 million Kenyans, or approximately 34 percent of the Kenyan population. Today, the drylands are impoverished, deficient for both humans and nature. Their vulnerability to disasters is amplified, while their resilience to shocks is greatly weakened, a situation made worse by climate change. To understand the importance of community-based knowledges within policy making for sustainability and resilience, this article examines in detail epistemological, social, historical, political and environmental factors converging on the Kenyan drylands, as well as the opportunity to address this complexity that the SDGs represent.

Why are lions killing us? Human–wildlife conflict and social discontent in Mbire District, northern Zimbabwe

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Matema ◽  
Jens A. Andersson
Keyword(s):  
Local Governance ◽  
Salient Feature ◽  
Religious Discourse ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Elite Capture ◽  
Social Commentary ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Local Problems ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

AbstractAn emerging perspective on Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in Zimbabwe is that increased authoritarianism in governance has enabled elite capture of wildlife resources and silenced local people's voices. This paper qualifies this perspective, showing how ordinary people continue to raise their concerns about local governance. In the Mbire district, people's interpretations of an upsurge in lion attacks on livestock and people in early 2010 took on a dimension of social commentary on the evolving governance arrangements in the district and beyond. Beneath an apparent human–wildlife conflict lie complex human–human conflicts about access to, and governance of, wildlife resources. Interpretations of the lion attacks built on two distinct epistemologies – a local religious discourse on spirit lions and an ecological one – but invariably construed outsiders as the ones accountable for local problems. This construction of outsiders is also a salient feature of Zimbabwean political discourse. Local voices thus constitute a widely understood discourse of protest.

scholarly journals Displacement versus Co-existence in Human-Wildlife Conflict Zones: An Overview

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeetesh Rai
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Research Effort ◽  
Interaction Model ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Conflict Zones ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
The Social ◽  
The World ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

Wildlife presents both a threat and a resource to humans. Protected areas offer the best protection for conserving biodiversity and ecosystems worldwide. Despite more than half protected areas around the world being established on indigenous land natives are generally prohibited official access. However, protected areas are suffering from encroachment of surrounding population and almost half of all protected areas are heavily used for agriculture. Those in the tropics especially are experiencing serious and increasing degradation from poor management of development projects, agricultural encroachment, and illegal resource use. As a result, human-wildlife conflict is a significant and growing problem around the world. The literature reviewed for this paper has been notable for its polarised assessment of the human-wildlife conflict. On one side are the biological sciences, devoted to understanding the mechanisms of biodiversity loss and its consequences for conservation. On the other side are the social scientists, concerned with livelihood issues in and outside protected areas. Cernea and Schmidt-Soltau claim that these two groups have had an unequal influence on policy, with biological sciences having devoted a “broader, deeper and more systematic research effort than the social sciences” [1:3]. To avoid some of the bias towards biological sciences present in the literature, this paper will examine the underlying conditions required for co-existence. As such, I developed the ‘human-wildlife interaction model’.

scholarly journals Human–wildlife conflict, benefit sharing and the survival of lions in pastoralist community‐based conservancies

2016 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 1195-1205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Blackburn ◽  
J. Grant C. Hopcraft ◽  
Joseph O. Ogutu ◽  
Jason Matthiopoulos ◽  
Laurence Frank
Keyword(s):  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Pastoralist Community ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

scholarly journals Community perception of the real impacts of human–wildlife conflict in Laikipia, Kenya: capturing the relative significance of high-frequency, low-severity events

Oryx ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 497-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alec G. Blair ◽  
Thomas C. Meredith
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Full Range ◽  
Individual Species ◽  
Community Perception ◽  
Relative Significance ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

AbstractBiodiversity conservation outside protected areas requires cooperation from affected communities, hence the extensive discussions of trade-offs in conservation, and of a so-called new conservation that addresses human relations with nature more fully. Human–wildlife conflict is one aspect of those relations, and as land use intensifies around protected areas the need to understand and manage its effects will only increase. Research on human–wildlife conflict often focuses on individual species but given that protecting wildlife requires protecting habitat, assessments of human–wildlife conflict should include subsidiary impacts that are associated with ecosystem conditions. Using a case study from Laikipia, Kenya, where conservation outside protected areas is critical, we analysed human–wildlife conflict from a household perspective, exploring the full range of impacts experienced by community members on Makurian Group Ranch. We addressed questions about four themes: (1) the relationship between experienced and reported human–wildlife conflict; (2) the results of a high-resolution assessment of experienced human–wildlife conflict; (3) the relative impact of high-frequency, low-severity conflict vs high-severity, low-frequency conflict; and (4) the effect of experienced conflict on receptivity to the conservation narrative. Our results show that high-frequency, low-severity conflict, which is often absent from reports and discussion in the literature, is a significant factor in shaping a community's perception of the cost–benefit ratio of conservation. Local, ongoing, high-resolution monitoring of human–wildlife conflict may facilitate more realistic and effective incorporation of the experienced impacts of human–wildlife conflict in conservation planning and management. Such monitoring could help to define locally appropriate trade-offs in conservation and thereby improve conservation outcomes.

scholarly journals Household livelihoods and conflict with wildlife in community-based conservation areas across northern Tanzania

Oryx ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 702-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Salerno ◽  
Monique Borgerhoff Mulder ◽  
Mark N. Grote ◽  
Margherita Ghiselli ◽  
Craig Packer
Keyword(s):  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Conservation Strategy ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Community Based Conservation ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Household Livelihoods

AbstractConservation strategies to protect biodiversity and support household livelihoods face numerous challenges. Across the tropics, efforts focus on balancing trade-offs in local communities near the borders of protected areas. Devolving rights and control over certain resources to communities is increasingly considered necessary, but decades of attempts have yielded limited success and few lessons on how such interventions could be successful in improving livelihoods. We investigated a key feature of household well-being, the experience of food insecurity, in villages across Tanzania's northern wildlife tourist circuit. Using a sample of 2,499 primarily livestock-keeping households we compared food insecurity in villages participating in the country's principal community-based conservation strategy with nearby control areas. We tested whether community-based projects could offset the central costs experienced by households near strictly protected areas (i.e. frequent human–wildlife conflict and restricted access to resources). We found substantial heterogeneity in outcomes associated with the presence of community-based conservation projects across multiple project sites. Although households in project villages experienced more frequent conflict with wildlife and received few provisioned benefits, there is evidence that these households may have been buffered to some degree against negative effects of wildlife conflict. We interpret our results in light of qualitative institutional factors that may explain various project outcomes. Tanzania, like many areas of conservation importance, contains threatened biodiversity alongside areas of extreme poverty. Our analyses highlight the need to examine more precisely the complex and locally specific mechanisms by which interventions do or do not benefit wildlife and local communities.

scholarly journals Human-Wildlife Conflict and its Implication for Conservation at Sundarpur, Udayapur, Eastern Nepal

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-233
Author(s):  
Manoj Pokharel ◽  
Chandramani Aryal
Keyword(s):  
Wildlife Conservation ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Conservation Education ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
N 93 ◽  
Sloth Bear ◽  
Robust Compensation ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

Local people are the major stakeholders of biodiversity conservation. Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) could result in a negative attitude of the general public towards wildlife adding challenges for conservation. This is more applicable in the landscapes which are outside the protected area (PA) coverage. But, the majority of HWC related studies in Nepal have centered on PAs and their peripheries. This study documents the prevailing situation of HWC in Sundarpur of Udayapur district that shelters some HWC prone wildlife species, while situating outside PA. Data about conflict and people's perception of wildlife conservation was collected using household surveys supplemented by key informant interviews and direct observation. Monkeys (93%, n=93) and elephants (86%, n=86) were found to be the major animals involved in the conflict, mostly resulting in crop raiding, the major form of conflict as reported by (95%, n=95) of respondents. Livestock depredation cases were mostly by common leopard (84%, n=21) and sloth bear was involved in the majority of human attack cases (90%, n=9). The results showed increasing trend of conflicts for elephants (63%, n=63) and monkeys (73%, n=73), while declining trend for sloth bear (64%, n=64), wild boar (85%, n=85), and leopard (46%, n=46). People believed the natural attraction of wildlife towards crops and livestock to be the major driving factor of conflict. Majority of respondents had a positive attitude towards wildlife conservation. However, implementation of community based conflict management strategies, robust compensation schemes along with conservation education programs are highly essential to achieve desired conservation success.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document