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

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.

Download Full-text

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

Conservation Letters ◽

10.1111/conl.12679 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

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

Download Full-text

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

The Journal of Modern African Studies ◽

10.1017/s0022278x14000664 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 53 (1) ◽

pp. 93-120 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

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.

Download Full-text

Coexistence between human and wildlife: the nature, causes and mitigations of human wildlife conflict around Bale Mountains National Park, Southeast Ethiopia

BMC Ecology ◽

10.1186/s12898-020-00319-1 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Sefi Mekonen

Keyword(s):

National Park ◽

Local Community ◽

Group Discussion ◽

Local Communities ◽

Mitigation Strategies ◽

Crop Damage ◽

Benefit Sharing ◽

Human Settlement ◽

Wildlife Conflict ◽

Human Wildlife Conflict

Abstract Human–wildlife conflict occurs when the needs and behavior of wildlife impact negatively on humans or when humans negatively affect the needs of wildlife. To explore the nature, causes and mitigations of human wildlife conflict, the coexistence between human and wildlife assessment was conducted around Bale Mountains National Park. Data were collected by means of household questionnaires, focus group discussion, interview, field observation and secondary sources. The nature and extent of human wildlife conflict in the study area were profoundly impacted humans, wild animal and the environment through crop damage, habitat disturbance and destruction, livestock predation, and killing of wildlife and human. The major causes of conflict manifested that agricultural expansion (30%), human settlement (24%), overgrazing by livestock (14%), deforestation (18%), illegal grass collection (10%) and poaching (4%). To defend crop raider, farmers have been practiced crop guarding (34%), live fencing (26%), scarecrow (22%), chasing (14%), and smoking (5%). However, fencing (38%), chasing (30%), scarecrow (24%) and guarding (8%) were controlling techniques to defend livestock predator animals. As emphasized in this study, human–wildlife conflicts are negative impacts on both human and wildlife. Accordingly, possible mitigate possibilities for peaceful co-existence between human and wildlife should be create awareness and training to the local communities, identifying clear border between the closure area and the land owned by the residents, formulate rules and regulation for performed local communities, equal benefit sharing of the local communities and reduction of human settlement encroachment into the national park range. Generally, researcher recommended that stakeholders and concerned bodies should be creating awareness to local community for the use of wildlife and human–wildlife conflict mitigation strategies.

Download Full-text

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

International Journal of Environment ◽

10.3126/ije.v9i2.32750 ◽

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.

Download Full-text