Community Perceptions of Human-wildlife Conflicts and the Compensation Scheme Around Nyungwe National Park (Rwanda)

Umuziranenge Gloriose

doi:10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.15

Abstract

In African countries, crop-raiding by wild animals and human-wildlife conflicts are recurrent and common concerns for conservationists, protected areas managers and surrounding populations. At different levels, these challenges hinder the achievement of conservation goals. Although researchers have widely studied human-wildlife conflicts in Nyungwe National Park, few have examined its impact and lived experiences of local communities who are regularly facing crop-raiding by wild animals. The present study conducted in areas adjacent to the park including those affected with a high rate of crop raiding aimed to assess: (1) the community perceptions on human-wildlife conflicts and (2) the community perceptions on the compensation schemes set up to minimize the conflicts. For this purpose, a qualitative method was adopted. It relied on field semi-structured interviews with the representatives of conservation key stakeholders including local communities that experienced crop raiding. On one hand, the findings indicated that communities affected by generalized crop raiding are complaining about socio-economic and livelihood losses, food insecurity and injury. On the other hand, they showed that affected communities are not satisfied with the compensation scheme. Difficult requirements for compensation, complicated compensation procedure, rejection of compensation claims, undervalued payment and irregular compensation and delay of payments were identified as key problems that keep human-wildlife conflicts at high levels. The compensation process is so slow, so long and so costly that the victims of crop raiding abandon compensation claims. As a result, local communities continue to deal with self-defense since monetary compensation is unable to decrease the level of crop raiding. The findings call for an improved compensation scheme for reduced human-wildlife conflicts and efficient management following the model of effective compensation. Even though fencing the Park could be expensive, it would be a viable option to minimize wild-animals escape from the park. In addition, enhancing collective guiding system was proposed by the local community as their innovative strategy that could reduce crop raiding.

Highlights

Worldwide in general and in Africa in particular, human-wildlife conflicts around natural forests are serious challenges for conservation initiatives by authorities and local communities [1,2,3,4]
Respondents were asked five key questions: (1) to share how they perceive the challenge of crop raiding as neighbors of the park, (2) to show how crop raiding has impacted their households, (3) to tell what has been done do resolve the issue, (4) to indicate the challenges that are still found to resolve the issue of crop raiding both on the side of the local community and Rwanda Development Board (RDB), and (5) to tell how they perceive the process of compensation for crop raiding
The local community wishes to be paid on time and suggests the increase of the fund allocated to the compensation scheme, especially crop damages and human attacks

Summary

Introduction

Worldwide in general and in Africa in particular, human-wildlife conflicts around natural forests are serious challenges for conservation initiatives by authorities and local communities [1,2,3,4]. The killing of wild animals is caused by the lack of financial and socio-economic compensations for damaged crops, properties and human lives [21, 23] Both people and wildlife experience serious problems of crop raiding and wildlife attacks by the local community which lead to misunderstanding and conflicts between local communities and conservationists. The research aims to: (1) explore and understand the community’s perceptions with regards to crop raiding and (2) investigate and understand how the community perceives the compensation fund and process initiated by RDB in NNP It intends to check if local population opinions on wildlife and conservation are influenced or not by benefit scheme to offer job and support the development projects of the people living around NNP and compensation of wildlife damage to property, and to human life

Methods

Results

Conclusion