Conflict between people and carnivores can lead to the widespread killing of predators in retaliation for livestock loss and is a major threat to predator populations. In Kenya, a large, rural, pastoralist population comes into regular conflict with predators, which persist across southern Kenya. We explored the social and psychological backdrop to livestock management practices in this area in a process designed to be easy to use and suitable for use across large areas for the study of conflict and transboundary implementation of wildlife conflict reduction measures, focusing on community involvement and needs. We carried out fully structured interviews of livestock managers with a survey tool that examined how social and psychological factors may influence livestock management behavior. We compared survey responses on 3 sites across the study area, resulting in 723 usable responses. Efficacy of individuals' livestock management varied between and within communities. This variation was partially explained by normative and control beliefs regarding livestock management. Individual livestock managers' self-reported management issues were often an accurate reflection of their practical management difficulties. Psychological norms, control beliefs, and attitudes differed among sites, and these differences partially explained patterns associated with conflict (i.e., variation in livestock management behavior). Thus, we conclude that a one-size-fits-all approach to improving livestock management and reducing human-predator conflict is not suitable.

Attitudes, which can be thought of as the sum of individuals' thoughts, feelings, and beliefs concerning an attitude object, inform how people interact with the world around them. An understanding of attitudes may play an important role in promoting desirable human behavior, and attitudes studies should be incorporated into any behavior‐change intervention. One framework for understanding attitudes is the ABC, or “tripartite” model, which says that affect (“A,” i.e., emotional response); previous behavior (“B”); and cognition (“C,” i.e., beliefs) are the basis for an individual's attitude. Although this framework is widely used in social psychology, few conservation studies break down the “attitude” monolith into these more usable components. In this study, we sought apply the ABC framework to understand how affect and cognitive beliefs relate to overall attitude toward predators across southern Kenya and north‐west Zimbabwe. We used a factor analysis approach to identify latent affective (n = 3) and cognitive (n = 3) factors relating to human–predator interactions. These factors were then used to construct a regression model, which examined the power of the psychological factors to explain overall attitudes toward predators. We found that the model explained 27% of variation in attitudes, with four independently significant factors: location; perceived harms of living with predators; perceived benefits of killing predators; and positive affect. Although effect sizes were relatively small, these results suggest that cognitive beliefs may substantially influence attitudes, and therefore that interventions which seek to (a) remove the factual basis for negative beliefs and (b) improve perceptions or dispel unfounded beliefs may play a significant role in changing overall attitudes toward predators.

Peer review This article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated software

Human behavior often determines the success of conservation projects, and the emerging discipline of conservation psychology focuses on understanding and influencing this behavior. Social norms (a group's perception of the appropriateness of behaviors) are a key influence on human behavior, and social norms campaigns can often engender population-wide behavior changes. Human-predator conflict is a major conservation issue, and one in which human behavior plays a substantial role: high standards of livestock management can considerably lower predation levels. In this paper, we use factor analysis to show that the livestock management normative belief structure of rural livestock owners is highly conserved between populations in Kenya and Zimbabwe. Through cluster analysis, we also show that qualitatively distinct attitudinal groups can be identified, and that some of these groups are common to both regions. Researchers often assume that social landscapes are unique, but we show that this is not the case for livestock management norms. People's attitudes are also generally assumed to be site-specific, but we found commonalities across different regions, indicating that certain attitude sectors may be present in all livestock-owning populations. If livestock management norms and attitude groups are indeed highly conserved between regions, it may be possible to develop standardized tools with which to understand the norms that influence livestock management behavior, and identify population sectors for targeted interventions. Often, conservation projects have little inhouse social science expertise, and social studies are avoided despite the benefits they bring. Here, we demonstrate that standardized approaches may be possible, and could aid the implementation-and success-of conservation interventions.

No abstract