A Novel Approach to Assessing the Prevalence and Drivers of Illegal Bushmeat Hunting in the Serengeti

Abstract

Assessing anthropogenic effects on biological diversity, identifying drivers of human behavior, and motivating behavioral change are at the core of effective conservation. Yet knowledge of people’s behaviors is often limited because the true extent of natural resource exploitation is difficult to ascertain, particularly if it is illegal. To obtain estimates of rule-breaking behavior, a technique has been developed with which to ask sensitive questions. We used this technique, unmatched-count technique (UCT), to provide estimates of bushmeat poaching, to determine motivation and seasonal and spatial distribution of poaching, and to characterize poaching households in the Serengeti. We also assessed the potential for survey biases on the basis of respondent perceptions of understanding, anonymity, and discomfort. Eighteen percent of households admitted to being involved in hunting. Illegal bushmeat hunting was more likely in households with seasonal or full-time employment, lower household size, and longer household residence in the village. The majority of respondents found the UCT questions easy to understand and were comfortable answering them. Our results suggest poaching remains widespread in the Serengeti and current alternative sources of income may not be sufficiently attractive to compete with the opportunities provided by hunting. We demonstrate that the UCT is well suited to investigating noncompliance in conservation because it reduces evasive responses, resulting in more accurate estimates, and is technically simple to apply. We suggest that the UCT could be more widely used, with the trade-off being the increased complexity of data analyses and requirement for large sample sizes.

Managing social–ecological systems under uncertainty: implementation in the real world

“…Additionally, the respondents had generally similar views about the current and future status of the Serengeti but disagreed about how to address issues of conservation concern and were more uncertain about the effectiveness and actual outcomes of management interventions. Patterns found in fisheries can inform the design of governance structures; De Nooy (2013) found that centralized systems, such as found in the Serengeti, have more disagreement overall, and especially within stakeholder groups, whereas comanagement systems have more disagreement between groups.…”

Explanatory factors for household involvement in illegal bushmeat hunting around Serengeti, Tanzania

“…Only rarely, researchers will be able to follow hunters or openly record their bags as Coad et al (2010) did in Gabon. Usually, either (i) direct interview techniques, (ii) arrest records or (iii) dietary recall surveys are used (Loibooki et al, 2002;Knapp et al, 2010), and, more recently, also indirect interview approaches (Razafimanahaka et al, 2012;Nuno et al, 2013). Direct interviews with rural residents, asking openly about their involvement in hunting, require participants to explicitly admit to an essentially illegal (albeit possibly widespread and locally accepted) activity.…”

“…And estimates of household bushmeat consumption from dietary recall surveys (e.g., Foerster et al, 2011;Brashares et al, 2011) have been found a reliable proxy for overall hunting levels (Knapp et al, 2010), but do not per se distinguish between meat bought, and meat hunted by household members. Indirect interview techniques, in turn, such as the Unmatched-Count-Technique require large sample sizes to allow the probabilistic computation of the prevalence of hunting (Nuno et al, 2013) and are thus very data-hungry.…”

“…A large body of literature on ecological and economic aspects of bushmeat hunting, in both tropical forest as well as savannah habitats, exists, which has been summarised elsewhere (e.g., Bennett et al, 2007;Gandiwa, Heitkönig, Lokhorst, Prins, & Leeuwis, 2013;Nuno, Bunnefeld, Naiman, & Milner-Gulland, 2013). In brief, hunting and rural bushmeat consumption are usually seen as driven by economic factors such as the need for food or income, in contexts where alternative income sources are limited and bushmeat might be the cheapest protein available (Albrechtsen, Fa, Barry, & Macdonald, 2006;Kümpel, Milner-Gulland, Cowlishaw, & Rowcliffe, 2010).…”

“…A large number of studies have investigated correlates of bushmeat consumption (e.g., Brashares et al, 2011;Foerster et al, 2011). Studies on individuals' involvement in actual hunting are somewhat scarcer (e.g., Loibooki, Hofer, Campbell, & East, 2002;Nuno et al, 2013). Here, we add to the literature on the factors that explain household engagement in hunting by asking how situational factors (such as distance from potential hunting grounds) and household-related variables both at the individual and at the social level (such as perceptions of law enforcement, relative wealth and ethnic background) are related to hunting activities.…”