Stakeholder Perceptions of Success in Human-Carnivore Coexistence Interventions

Abstract

Human-carnivore coexistence (HCC) on agricultural lands affects wildlife and human communities around the world, whereby a lack of HCC is a central concern for conservation and farmer livelihoods alike. For intervention strategies aimed at facilitating HCC to achieve their desired goals it is essential to understand how interventions and their success are perceived by different stakeholders. Using a grounded theory approach, interviews (n=31) were conducted with key stakeholders (commercial livestock farmers, conservationists and protected area managers) involved in HCC scenarios in Limpopo, South Africa. Interviews explored perceptions of successful intervention strategies (aimed at increasing HCC), factors that contribute to perceptions of strategy effectiveness and whether coexistence was a concept that stakeholders considered achievable. The use of grounded theory emphasised the individual nature and previously unexplored facets to HCC experiences. The majority of stakeholders based their measures of success on changes in livestock loss. Concern has been raised over the subjectivity and reliance on recall that this measure involves, potentially reducing its reliability as an indicator of functional effectiveness. However, it was relied on heavily by users of HCC interventions in our study and is therefore likely influential in subsequent behaviour and decision-making regarding the intervention. Nonetheless, perceptions of success were not just shaped by livestock loss but influenced by various social, cultural, economic and political factors emphasising the challenges of defining and achieving HCC goals. Perceptions of coexistence varied; some stakeholders considered farmer-carnivore coexistence to be impossible, but most indicated it was feasible with certain caveats. An important element of inter-stakeholder misunderstanding became apparent, especially regarding the respective perceptions of coexistence and responsibility for its achievement. Without fully understanding these perceptions and their underpinning factors, interventions may be restricted in their capacity to meet the expectations of all interested parties. The study highlights the need to understand and explore the perceptions of all stakeholders when implementing intervention strategies in order to properly define and evaluate the achievement of HCC goals.

Leopard density and determinants of space use in a farming landscape in South Africa

“…We used data from a camera trap survey to estimate leopard density for the area and to explore anthropogenic and ecological factors influencing leopard habitat use. We discuss these findings in relation to recent work on local landowner perceptions collected through interview data by Lucas et al 27 . Finally, we outline the significance of these findings for leopard conservation and management across this and similar landscapes.…”

“…Limited research has investigated how large carnivores respond to human activity in situations where they do not have access to protected areas as a refuge 11 . With its mixed agricultural land use, as well as the level of leopard persecution 27 due to real or perceived threats to local livelihoods 28 , 29 , the Alldays area, Limpopo Province, South Africa, can be considered representative of the wider Limpopo Province 29 . We used data from a camera trap survey to estimate leopard density for the area and to explore anthropogenic and ecological factors influencing leopard habitat use.…”

Recruitment and satisfaction of commercial livestock farmers participating in a livestock guarding dog programme

“…At the same time, the conservation of some free-ranging carnivores, such as cheetahs ( Acinonyx jubatus ), relies heavily on coexistence with human stakeholders on unprotected land, such as agricultural areas (Durant et al 2017). We define coexistence here as a state in which people and wildlife are able to live in the same area, each with a respective right to endure (Lucas et al 2022). This definition emerged following inductive inquiry with our stakeholder group (albeit a slightly different sample group) as part of a separate study (Lucas et al 2022) and is therefore in keeping with the requirement for stakeholder input and avoidance of researcher-biased perceptions (Glikman et al 2021).…”

“…We define coexistence here as a state in which people and wildlife are able to live in the same area, each with a respective right to endure (Lucas et al 2022). This definition emerged following inductive inquiry with our stakeholder group (albeit a slightly different sample group) as part of a separate study (Lucas et al 2022) and is therefore in keeping with the requirement for stakeholder input and avoidance of researcher-biased perceptions (Glikman et al 2021).…”

“…Free-ranging carnivores in the region include leopard ( Panthera pardus ), brown hyena ( Hyaena brunnea ), spotted hyena ( Crocuta crocuta ), cheetah, caracal ( Caracal caracal ), African wild dog ( Lycaon pictus ) and black-backed jackal ( Canis mesomelas ) (Findlay 2016, Spencer et al 2020). Farmers experience livestock losses to carnivores, ranging from minor to severe, and employ a range of protection systems, including non-lethal and lethal control methods (Rust et al 2013, Lucas et al 2020).…”