Farmers’ Perspectives of Conflict at the Wildlife–Agriculture Boundary: Some Lessons Learned from African Subsistence Farmers

Abstract

This article outlines the importance of exploring farmers' perspectives of human-wildlife conflicts because people's perceptions and expectations shape their attitudes and responses to crop raiding by wildlife. A series of factors that influence farmers' perceptions of risk are examined to help explain why perceived risk of crop loss to wildlife is often significantly greater than any actual risk. This is explored in the context of (1) changing tolerance for wildlife activity on farms, (2) the implications of past conservation policy and practice for farmers' understanding of "ownership" of wildlife, and (3) how such issues influence farmers' expectations of who is responsible for protecting crops from wildlife.

Compensation Payments for Downsides Generated by Protected Areas

“…Daily business of protected area administration includes to a great extent the enforcement of laws and regulations that often shift traditional socio-economic relationships (Mbaiwa 2005;Liu et al 2010). Unfortunately, socio-economic relationships are not always recognized by protected area managers due to the lack of local knowledge, attention, and understanding (Hill 2004;McElwee 2010). Although knowledge of the socio-economic aspect is crucial to fostering a suitable context for conservation, including damage prevention and compensation (Sarkar and Montoya 2011), a professional background in the social sciences is rarely required for protected area managers.…”

Relationships between the Maned Wolf and People

“…As a consequence of the capitalist expansion the caipira 2 had to work harder: the pressure resulted in individualization and detachment from the social and economic harmony with the local environment towards a regional and national context (Candido 2001 IBAMA 2003. As an added pressure, new technology creates short cuts in labour and pressure to increase production and, in turn, it may lower farmers' tolerance to damage as it also distances them from nature (Knight 2000;Candido 2001;Hill 2004 in Freefy 1983;Bush 1995;Kruuk 2002). In fact, an alarming 33% of respondents believed that maned wolves' body parts were used for either fashion, medicinal or magical purposes, and 13% (n=7) of rural respondents believed maned wolves were killed because of the sale or use of parts of their body.…”

Protected Areas: Conservation Cornerstones or Paradoxes? Insights from Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Africa and Southeastern Europe

“…First, wildlife damage represents a very tangible threat to livelihoods in terms of personal injury, crop and livestock losses, property damage, and lost opportunity costs (Choudhury, 2004;Emerton, 2001;Happold, 1995;Hill, 2004;Graham et al, 2005;Linnell et al, 2010). Second, attitudes towards PAs are often influenced by real or perceived damage caused by wildlife (Anthony, 2007;de Boer & Baquete, 1998;Els, 1995;Hill, 2004).…”