African elephants: population trends and their causes

Douglas‐Hamilton, Iain

doi:10.1017/s0030605300020433

Cited by 122 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Crucially, the human population within the countries making up the elephant range in Africa (Figure 1) mostly live in rural areas (Martin, 2016). In most of these elephant range countries, the minimum human density for elephant co-existence (Parker and Graham, 1989) has been exceeded, resulting in population declines and severe range contraction of elephants (Douglas-Hamilton, 1987;Bouché et al, 2011;de Boer et al, 2013;Chase et al, 2016).…”

Section: How Do We Reconcile This?mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Spanner in the Works: Human–Elephant Conflict Complicates the Food–Water–Energy Nexus in Drylands of Africa

Githiru

Mutwiwa

Kasaine

et al. 2017

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two major conservation issues for drylands of Africa are habitat loss or degradation and habitat fragmentation, largely from agriculture, charcoal production, and infrastructural development. A key question for management is how these landscapes can retain their critical ecological functions and services, while simultaneously supporting resilient livelihoods. It is a clear nexus question involving food (agriculture), water, and energy (fuelwood), which is complicated by human-wildlife conflicts. While these could appear disparate issues, they are closely connected in dryland forest landscapes of Africa where elephants occur close to areas of human habitation. For instance, crop failure, whether due to weather or wildlife damage, is a key driver for rural farmers seeking alternative livelihoods and incomes, one of the commonest being charcoal production. Similarly, heavy reliance on wood-based energy often leads to degradation of wildlife habitat, which heightens competition with wildlife for food and water, increasing the possibility of crop-raiding. So, for multifunctional landscapes where elephants occur in close proximity with humans, any food-water-energy nexus activities toward achieving sustainability and resilience should consider human-elephant conflicts (HECs). Here, we broach these food-water-energy nexus issues with a focus on dryland areas of Africa and HECs. We highlight an ongoing study attempting to address this nexus holistically by employing a climate-smart agriculture (CSA) and agro-forestry based design, augmented by an elephant deterrent study and an eco-charcoal production venture.Keywords: climate-smart agriculture, human-wildlife conflict, integrated landscapes, Kasigau corridor, Tsavo ecosystem OVERVIEW OF THE NEXUS IN DRYLANDSHumanity requires food and water for existence, while energy is a primary driver for economic development. A growing human population, rapid economic growth and increasing prosperity and consumerism are driving up demand for food, water, and energy globally (Ozturk, 2015). The ability of existing food, water, and energy systems to meet this growing demand is constrained by the competing needs for limited resources across the different sectors. Increasingly, it has been shown that issues in the food, water, and energy sectors are closely interwoven and cannot be managed effectively without cross-sectoral integration. In South Asia for instance, Rasul (2014)

show abstract

Section: How Do We Reconcile This?mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Spanner in the Works: Human–Elephant Conflict Complicates the Food–Water–Energy Nexus in Drylands of Africa

Githiru

Mutwiwa

Kasaine

et al. 2017

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has been a growing concern about the survival of African elephant because of the threats from poaching, destruction of their habitat, competing land-uses and increased frequencies of droughts (Douglas-Hamilton, 1987, Blanc et al, 2005, Bouché et al, 2011, de Boer et al, 2013, Chase et al, 2016. For this reason, African elephant is listed as "Vulnerable" on the IUCN Red List (Blanc et al, 2007).…”

Section: Elephant Population Management In Arid Savannas In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conversely, in areas where elephant population are on the decline through various causes such as poaching (Douglas-Hamilton, 1987, Prins et al, 1994, Wittemyer, 2011, Chase et al, 2016, human-wildlife conflicts, disease outbreaks or natural causes such as drought (Dudley et al, 2001, Foley et al, 2008, the interest of wildlife managers is to reverse the trend. This is usually done through, for instance, reduction of elephant deaths by intensifying anti-poaching surveillance and disease control through veterinary services.…”

Section: Synthesis African Elephant In a Cleft Stickmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Continent-wide declines in African elephant populations are attributed largely to elephant poaching for ivory (Prins et al, 1994, Kahindi et al, 2010, Bouché et al, 2011, Burn et al, 2011, Maingi et al, 2012, Wittemyer et al, 2014, Chase et al, 2016 and loss of habitat associated with increased human population (Douglas-Hamilton, 1987, de Boer et al, 2013, Chase et al, 2016, but rarely to abiotic factors such as rainfall variability. Given the predicted increase in drought periods, the mortality of wildlife will likely rise, especially for species that are relatively more water dependent than others and those that require large amounts of daily food (Okello et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of telemetry has made it possible to describe the link between animal movement patterns and the distribution of key resources (forage and water) at a fine temporal and spatial scale (Douglas-Hamilton, 1987, Murwira et al, 2010, Ngene et al, 2010, Pittiglio et al, 2012. Most studies use remote sensing data as a proxy of forage availability (Mueller et al, 2008, Pettorelli et al, 2011 such as NDVI (Pettorelli et al, 2011, de Boer et al, 2013, to infer choice and selectivity of forage sites (Loarie et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations