The de jure and the de facto of the compensation payments system for human-elephant conflict in Sonitpur district, Assam

Abstract

Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) leads to losses of human life and property, often in already- marginalized communities. This in turn causes resentment towards and retaliatory action against globally endangered species. Compensation schemes are seen as a valuable reactive tool in mitigating HWC across the world, but there is also widespread acknowledgment that they often do not provide timely or sufficient remedy for HWC in practice. We conduct a case study of the provision of ex-gratia payments for human-elephant conflict in the Sonitpur East and Sonitpur West divisions of Assam, attempting to understand (a) whether the objectives of compensation are clearly delineated in national law or administrative documents or relevant case-law, (b) how the de jure and de facto processes of providing ex-gratia compare, and (c) whether ex-gratia appears to be achieving social justice or conservation objectives. We examine administrative guidelines, case law, and process documents for ex-gratia, as well as conduct qualitative interviews with both government officials and villagers who experienced human-elephant conflict. We conclude that in order to promote social justice and wildlife conservation, the objectives of Assam’s system for compensation in cases of human-wildlife conflict should be made explicit and the administrative process should be clarified and streamlined, and we discuss specific recommendations.