Carnivores, Colonization, and Conflict: A Qualitative Case Study on the Intersectional Persecution of Predators and People in Namibia

Rust, Niki A.; Taylor, Nicola

doi:10.1080/08927936.2016.1228758

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Like previous studies (Rust andTaylor 2016, Homewood et al 2020), a focus on the intersectionality of both fixed and mutable identities, including gender, age, ability, and ethnicity, allowed us to show that not all people had a singular, shared experienced with HEI. Of particular interest is the blanket assumption that women are most vulnerable to HEI, and previous studies reveal incalculable costs borne by women during livelihood activities in an elephant landscape (Ogra 2008, DeMotts andHoon 2012).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Driven by critiques from feminist political ecologists who show that individuals of the same group are not homogenous (Crenshaw 1991), the concept of intersectionality offers useful insights to understand how people may perceive risk and experience vulnerability differently (Carr andThompson 2014, Ravera et al 2016). Research that uses an intersectional lens to look at interactions across facets of identities has offered important insights into how women experience vulnerability differently (e.g., Mollett andFaria 2013, Doubleday 2020), and intersectionality has increasingly been used as a lens in conservation research for its ability to shed light on the diversity of experiences people of who live with wildlife (Rust andTaylor 2016, Homewood et al 2020).…”

Section: Perceived Risk Adaptation and Vulnerability To Elephantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Where elephants roam: perceived risk, vulnerability, and adaptation in the Okavango Delta

Redmore¹,

Stronza²,

Songhurst³

et al. 2020

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Where people and elephants share space, the chance of human-elephant interactions (HEI) shape how people make livelihood decisions, including where and when to harvest resources. In the Eastern Panhandle of the Okavango Delta in Botswana, elephant populations have doubled in the past 10 years. Currently 16,000 men and women from different ethnic backgrounds share woodlands with 18,000 elephants. People carry out livelihoods in ways that are shaped by multiple facets of their identities, including gender, age, ability, and ethnicity. Residents depend on firewood for energy, but collecting firewood where elephants may be is risky because elephants can kill people. Using an intersectional approach, we asked how do facets of people's identities influence perceived risk, ability to adapt, and vulnerability to HEI? We conducted one year of mixed method, ethnographic research in the village of Mokgacha in the Eastern Panhandle. We found that both men and women collected elephant-felled firewood but had different perceptions of risk to HEI and adapted in different ways. Women often harvested in groups and the middle of the day, whereas men harvested alone in the morning and evenings while tending to cattle, leaving them vulnerable to elephants. Because of physical limitations, the elderly and people with disabilities were vulnerable to HEI and relied on resource sharing from family to reduce their vulnerability to HEI. Settlement history also influenced how people of different ethnicities are vulnerable because of access to environments with low visibility and higher chance of HEI. This work provides insights on who, how, and when people adapt to minimize the potential danger of HEI when collecting firewood. To reduce unwanted HEI and ensure continued support for elephants by rural residents, conservation interests should focus efforts on building solutions that recognize social diversity, recognize local perceptions of risk, and reinforce culturally relevant adaptations.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Perceived Risk Adaptation and Vulnerability To Elephantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where elephants roam: perceived risk, vulnerability, and adaptation in the Okavango Delta

Redmore¹,

Stronza²,

Songhurst³

et al. 2020

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While pastoralists in our study were generally favorable toward wildlife as a whole, their relationship with predators is strained due to significant livestock depredation (e.g., Thomas et al, ). As in other parts of the world, Namibians kill predators due to the real and perceived threats they pose to livestock (Marker, Mills, & Macdonald, ; Rust & Taylor, ; Stein, Fuller, Damery, Sievert, & Marker, ), a growing challenge in Namibia despite concerted efforts to limit such conflicts (NACSO, ). Negative interactions with lions, in particular, were reported across a majority (66.3%) of interviews, although the conflict report data we accessed for the same region showed that lions were not the most damaging species to livestock (NACSO, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using pastoral ideology to understand human–wildlife coexistence in arid agricultural landscapes

Laverty

Teel

Thomas

et al. 2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrating social and ecological knowledge is requisite for solutions to global conservation problems, including human–wildlife conflict, but gathering sufficient data to facilitate integration has proved difficult. Social–ecological systems models have also traditionally overlooked individual human thought and behavior that can affect the success of management interventions. In response to these challenges, we drew upon psychological theory and long‐term ecological data on wildlife populations and conflict occurrence to inform qualitative research on pastoralists' values toward wildlife in the northern Namib Desert. We explored how values and ecological conditions shaped individuals': (a) interactions with and tolerance of species; and (b) perceptions of challenges and potential solutions to living with wildlife. Semi‐structured interview data revealed a prevailing domination value orientation toward wildlife, reflected in concerns for human and livestock wellbeing. Despite these concerns and high rates of reported conflicts, pastoralists were generally tolerant of wildlife, including predators, and indicated this in their proposed management solutions. In addition to its practical implications for informing human–wildlife coexistence strategies in the Namibian context, our approach advances knowledge about wildlife values globally, offers insights on the utility of qualitative assessments for cross‐cultural social–ecological systems research, and furthers understanding of conservation challenges and opportunities in extreme arid environments.

show abstract

“…A semi-structured interview guide informed by similar studies was used, with latitude to explore topics more deeply as they emerged through the interview (Drury et al, 2011;Bennett, 2016). An iterative process of collection-transcription-analysis was used to determine corroboration and saturation of interview data, which included comparing and contrasting data to develop provisional descriptions of the problem perspectives (Patton, 1990;Clark et al, 2008;Rust and Taylor, 2016). Once data saturation was met, meaning no new patterns or themes emerged, data collection ceased (Fusch and Ness, 2015).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Hughes

Yarmey

Morehouse³

et al. 2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since their threatened species listing in 2010, grizzly bear recovery has been a controversial policy issue in Alberta, Canada particularly because this charismatic carnivore represents a diverse set of values, both positive (e.g., an icon of beauty and the wilderness) and negative (e.g., a safety threat and economic risk to peoples' livelihoods). Previous human dimensions research on grizzly bear conservation has accounted for the values and attitudes different groups of people hold for these bears, as well as their views on conflict mitigation strategies. However, the conservation literature is more limited in assessing the perspectives different people hold for grizzly bear conservation in a policy context. Arguably, understanding the policy landscape in which carnivore conservation occurs is important to achieve desired goals and objectives for species and the people expected to live with them and implement policy action. Using a case study approach between 2012 and 2014 and borrowing from the policy sciences problem-oriented framework, we identify the dominant problem perspectives in Alberta's grizzly bear recovery policy using document review and interviews with participants from government, the natural resource sector, and environmental non-governmental organizations. We identify that ordinary and constitutive problem perspectives share common features across participants in this study, including frustrations with lack of policy clarity, implementation inefficiencies and committed political and financial action, and perhaps even more important, the challenges in policy decision-making and governance. We discuss the importance of meaningful engagement of people who live with large carnivores and the impacts of conservation policy, which is applicable to both a local and global scale, as success in large carnivore conservation must include the people who will ultimately implement conservation action.

show abstract

Carnivores, Colonization, and Conflict: A Qualitative Case Study on the Intersectional Persecution of Predators and People in Namibia

Cited by 17 publications

References 43 publications

Where elephants roam: perceived risk, vulnerability, and adaptation in the Okavango Delta

Where elephants roam: perceived risk, vulnerability, and adaptation in the Okavango Delta

Using pastoral ideology to understand human–wildlife coexistence in arid agricultural landscapes

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About