Title
Assessing patterns of human-wildlife conflicts and compensation around a central Indian protected area
Author(s)
Karanth, K. K.;Gopalaswamy, A. M.;DeFries, R.;Ballal, N.
Published
2012
Publisher
PLoS ONE
Abstract
Mitigating crop and livestock loss to wildlife and improving compensation distribution are important for conservation efforts in landscapes where people and wildlife co-occur outside protected areas. The lack of rigorously collected spatial data poses a challenge to management efforts to minimize loss and mitigate conflicts. We surveyed 735 households from 347 villages in a 5154 km2 area surrounding Kanha Tiger Reserve in India. We modeled self-reported household crop and livestock loss as a function of agricultural, demographic and environmental factors, and mitigation measures. We also modeled self-reported compensation received by households as a function of demographic factors, conflict type, reporting to authorities, and wildlife species involved. Seventy-three percent of households reported crop loss and 33% livestock loss in the previous year, but less than 8% reported human injury or death. Crop loss was associated with greater number of cropping months per year and proximity to the park. Livestock loss was associated with grazing animals inside the park and proximity to the park. Among mitigation measures only use of protective physical structures were associated with reduced livestock loss. Compensation distribution was more likely for tiger related incidents, and households reporting loss and located in the buffer. Average estimated probability of crop loss was 0.93 and livestock loss was 0.60 for surveyed households. Estimated crop and livestock loss and compensation distribution were higher for households located inside the buffer. Our approach modeled conflict data to aid managers in identifying potential conflict hotspots, influential factors, and spatially maps risk probability of crop and livestock loss. This approach could help focus allocation of conservation efforts and funds directed at conflict prevention and mitigation where high densities of people and wildlife co-occur. © 2012 Karanth et al.
Keywords
agricultural management;article;community ecology;conflict;crop;death;demography;environmental health;grazing;household;human;human impact (environment);India;injury;livestock;national park;protective equipment;risk assessment;self report;tiger;wildlife
Access Full Text
A full-text copy of this article may be available. Please email the WCS Library to request.
![]()
Back
PUB14080