Human attitudes towards the conservation of protected areas: a case study from four protected areas in Bangladesh

Abstract

This study was based on interviews with 388 randomly selected households living near four protected areas in northern and south-eastern Bangladesh: Chunati Wildlife Sanctuary, Teknaf Game Reserve and two forest reserves. The respondents were generally poor and their perception of conservation varied across the study areas. Respondents were generally reluctant to embrace conservation and their attitude towards the conservation of protected areas depended on a set of demographic and socio-economic factors. People in northern Bangladesh had somewhat more positive attitudes towards conservation than those in the south-east. The two most important variables explaining respondents' attitudes towards conservation were the distance they lived from protected areas and their monthly income. People who are poor and who live closer to the protected areas disliked the conservation measures most. This paper contains supplementary material that can be found online at

Patterns and extent of threats to the protected areas of Bangladesh: the need for a relook at conservation strategies

“…In addition, there are a number of eco-parks and safari parks, which are extremely small by comparison to the scheduled protected areas, and are designed to serve 'nature recreation' needs rather than large scale conservation needs (Chowdhury et al, 2009). Historically, protected areas in Bangladesh have been managed using approaches that exclude local people, whose interests have been viewed as incompatible with the conservation of these areas (Sarker & Roskaft, 2011). As noted by Bengtsson et al (2003), protected areas are subject to both natural and human-induced disturbances at various scales, but it is the intensification of disturbance arising from human activity that is their principal threat (Chape et al, 2005), and can be well expressed by the term 'anthropogenic threats'.…”

“…Stakeholder participation in the stages of forest planning and decision making is essential to get long-lasting and viable solutions regarding the mitigation of the threats (Bruna-Garcia & Marey-Perez, 2014). Because the nature of conflicts between people and protected areas varies regionally and according to the communities social values and economic status, it is imperative to design participatory protected area programmes to suit local needs (Sarker & Roskaft, 2011). It must be recognized that the state has an important role to play in protected area governance and that these roles will often be more strategic, instrumental and, to a degree, controlling in nature, in order to ensure the fulfillment of obligations to legal institutions such as the CBD and related regional and national policies, as well as related obligations to wider society and future generations (Jones, 2013).…”

“…The present study discovered that conflict is prevalent in the protected areas of hill and mangrove forests; and mostly arises from the damage of crops and houses by elephants and attacks on humans by tigers. Human-wildlife conflict in hilly regions arises from specific problems such as crop raiding, destruction of homes, and fear of collecting water and firewood in the evening because of wild elephants (Sarker & Roskaft, 2011 reduce the number of human deaths. The hunting of 'problem animals', however, is not currently legally acceptable or in line with conservation objectives to preserve tiger population in Bangladesh.…”

“…As an alternative to traditional state forest management, people-oriented forestry has been introduced in Bangladesh to increase the country's forest cover (Muhammed et al, 2008) and community-based forest management using the co-management approach (Borrini-Feyerbund, 1996) was introduced in Bangladesh's protected areas in 2004 (Chowdhury et al, 2011). Sarker & Roskaft (2011) commented that this approach has grown out of attempts to find new solutions for the failure of the so-called 'fences and fines' approach to conservation in the country. As a result there has been a slow but visible change towards comanagement in protected areas of Bangladesh (Rashid et al, 2013).…”

Local People’s Perceptions of Crop Damage by Common Langurs (Semnopithecus entellus) and Human-langur Conflict in Keshabpur of Bangladesh

“…Concern is currently growing related to food and other needs of humans that have jeopardized the ability to live in close association with primates (Cowlishaw & Dunbar, 2000;Hill, 2000). To date, crop raiding by wildlife including primates has received a great deal of attention in and around protected areas across Asia and Africa (Agetsuma, 2007;Chhangani & Mohnot, 2004;Hill, 1997;Naughton-Treves, 1998;Pirta, Gadgil, & Kharshikar, 1997;Riley, 2007;Saj, Sicotte & Paterson, 2001;Sarker & Røskaft, 2010;Sarker & Røskaft, 2011b;Strum, 1994;Tweheyo, Hill & Obua, 2005;Webber, Hill, & Reynolds, 2007). Apart from the studies of crop raiding by wildlife, especially Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) around protected areas (Aziz, Feeroz, & Shahriar, 2005;Feeroz, Aziz, Islam, & Islam, 2003;Islam & Al Zabed, 1992;Miah, Rahman, & Ahsan, 2001;Sarker & Røskaft, 2011a) no studies have been conducted on crop damage by primates in human settlements in Bangladesh.…”